My Challenge to the Conservative Christians

[aeroz22]

Specifically, to the rigid-thinking fundamentalist Christians who think that they are right and everyone else is wrong:

What makes you think you have the absolute correct view, interpretation, and opinion on subjects such as ethics, the Bible, morality, science, philosophy--you name it?

Are the other people just blind? Stupid? Why is your perspective right and theirs wrong?

CHALLENGE: If you think that only your views can possibly be correct, and you cannot consider other people's opposing opinions and interpretations as equal to yours, please, enlighten me. Tell me why their opinions, interpretations (including of the Bible), and perspectives are inferior to yours and cannot be considered equal? I look forward to your response.

 

[Lisa0315]

Specifically, to the rigid-thinking fundamentalist Christians:

What makes you think you have the absolute correct view, interpretation, and opinion on subjects such as ethics, the Bible, morality, science, philosophy--you name it?

Are the other people just blind? Stupid? Why is your perspective right and theirs wrong?

CHALLENGE: If you think that only your views can possibly be correct, and you cannot consider other people's opposing opinions and interpretations as equal to yours, please, enlighten me. Tell me why their opinions, interpretations (including of the Bible), and perspectives are inferior to yours and cannot be considered equal? I look forward to your response.

I am a Conservative Christian and I don't think your description portrays me. Ask me about a particular doctrine and I might can respond better.

Lisa

 

[aeroz22]

I am a Conservative Christian and I don't think your description portrays me. Ask me about a particular doctrine and I might can respond better.

Lisa

Are you a rigid-thinking fundamentalist Christian?

 

[Lisa0315]

Are you a rigid-thinking fundamentalist Christian?

I don't know. There are some beliefs that I hold deeply. I attend a fundamentalist Baptist church. I cannot answer you without a more specific question.

Lisa

 

[FaithLikeARock]

Well technically that same question can be turned around straight back to some super Liberal atheists who think they're correct in everything. One day people will learn that there are ignorant, bigoted jerks on both sides.

That said, I'm liberal so I don't technically apply. Just pointing this out.

 

[aeroz22]

OP edited

 

[Lisa0315]

Well, I read the edited OP, and I still do not see myself in that. I spend most of my time in GA talking with atheists. I do believe that sex outside the confines of marriage is a sin. I do not focus on homosexuals but believe one sexual sin is the same as another. One of the best internet friends is possessed by demons but has a great deal of faith. Most fundies would think that is impossible. I have worked with a Satanist on this board to defend someone who was accused unfairly. I do believe that the KJV is the best translation we have short of the original texts. I do not agree with several things in Roman Catholicism, but I post there often as well and am welcomed there. I am very much against abortion and I have spent countless hours on here posting why. However, I would rather work with Pro-Choice advocates to reduce the number of abortions rather than spin my wheels constantly arguing over how God feels about it.

So, I think that there may be a small percentage of fundies who could be described by the OP, but most of the people I know are not that way.

I think what you are describing is more of a characterization than reality.

Lisa

 

[WhatThe]

Lisa, i think aeroz is refering to the people who automatically respond "No, You're WRONG, I'm RIGHT!" to everything before they even read or think about it.

 

[jamielindas]

Well technically that same question can be turned around straight back to some super Liberal atheists who think they're correct in everything. One day people will learn that there are ignorant, bigoted jerks on both sides.

That said, I'm liberal so I don't technically apply. Just pointing this out.

Agreed!
There are plenty of jerks on this side (liberal atheists) as well.

I try not to be one of those guys. I'm an empiricist, as such, I'm all about the evidence and the facts. I realize that interpretation can be subjective, but I am apt to call people out when their 'interpretation' of the data/facts isn't supported by the data for facts. Also, it's hard to be really conclusive about anything, but you can be pretty sure on something based on evidence and probability.

 

[uberd00b]

Well technically that same question can be turned around straight back to some super Liberal atheists who think they're correct in everything. One day people will learn that there are ignorant, bigoted jerks on both sides.

That said, I'm liberal so I don't technically apply. Just pointing this out.

I'm not sure, I think in general the atheist (or liberal, though they shouldn't be conflated) side can actually usually give a solid reason behind their points of view.

The religious or dogmatic side often cannot, relying on "it is written" as their base.

I think you're giving one side too much (or too little) credit in this matter.

 

[FaithLikeARock]

I'm not sure, I think in general the atheist (or liberal, though they shouldn't be conflated) side can actually usually give a solid reason behind their points of view.

The religious or dogmatic side often cannot, relying on "it is written" as their base.

I think you're giving one side too much (or too little) credit in this matter.

Can you hear the irony?

I don't think I am. Just because one can give solid reasoning doesn't mean they do and even though they do, you can't prove the existence of God and yet many atheists make fun of Christians and Christianity for having "imaginary friends" which is, in affect, assuming they're right over an issue that can't be proven. And there are several people like this. They're just not as loud as some of the fundamentalist Christian wackos.

 

[jamielindas]

Can you hear the irony?

I don't think I am. Just because one can give solid reasoning doesn't mean they do and even though they do, you can't prove the existence of God and yet many atheists make fun of Christians and Christianity for having "imaginary friends" which is, in affect, assuming they're right over an issue that can't be proven. And there are several people like this. They're just not as loud as some of the fundamentalist Christian wackos.

Though I partially agree with you, I'm still going to side with anyone that can present me with evidence/data to support their point/cause/etc.

If something cannot be proven to exist and cannot be proven to have measurable effects on the physical world, what's the difference between this something and something imaginary?

 

[Lisa0315]

Yeah, there are definitely atheists who have this kind of mindset too. The thing that blows my mind is if they try to argue Scripture. I am not talking interpretation, but are attacking the very basic faith in which most if not all Christians agree on. There are few Christians who would disagree with the fact that Jesus was sinless. Yet, there is one atheist in particular who thinks he has proven Christianity to be false because according to his reading of Scripture, Jesus was a sinner. After many attempts to show him why he was wrong, I had to walk away because he was becoming a bit manic about it.

Lisa

 

[FaithLikeARock]

Though I partially agree with you, I'm still going to side with anyone that can present me with evidence/data to support their point/cause/etc.

If something cannot be proven to exist and cannot be proven to have measurable effects on the physical world, what's the difference between this something and something imaginary?

Absence of knowledge doesn't mean nonexistence. There's no proof on either side and you can prove nonexistence. So both sides have every right to believe what they believe.

 

[WhatThe]

I think it depends on the context, Lisa. As a Christian, i don't doubt that Jesus was sin-free, but i think the point can be made that as a Jew, he was. It all depends on the point of view.
That said, it wouldn't matter if Jesus was a sinner as a Jew, because he is percieved as a Christian.

 

[Lisa0315]

I think it depends on the context, Lisa. As a Christian, i don't doubt that Jesus was sin-free, but i think the point can be made that as a Jew, he was. It all depends on the point of view.
That said, it wouldn't matter if Jesus was a sinner as a Jew, because he is percieved as a Christian.

No, I argued it out sufficiently. The charge that Christ was brought to trial and convicted of was blasphemy. Blasphemy is mentioned one time in the Old Testament and refers to disrespect to God. It may range from anything from idolotry to taking the Lord's Name in Vain. Jesus called Himself God and was convicted by the words, "You say, I Am". It refers to the I Am of the Old Testament and if anyone else had said it, it WOULD have been blasphemy, but if it is TRUE, then, it is obviously not. Jesus could say He was God because He was.

Lisa

 

[WhatThe]

Hmm it's interesting. Again, it depends on your view point. For a Christian, to whom Jesus is God/the Son of God, then it isn't blasphemy. However, to a Muslim, who would consider Jesus to be a prophet rather then God, then it could be considered to be blasphemous.

 

[cantata]

But Jesus wasn't executed because of blasphemy anyway. Crucifixion was a Roman execution, not a Jewish one, so he must have been executed by the Romans, and the Romans wouldn't have executed him for blaspheming against the Jewish god.

They probably executed him because overturning the tables in the temple marked him as a dangerous rebel. The Romans didn't want a Romano-Jewish war. (They got one eventually, of course.) Of course, it's possible that some Jewish authority colluded with the Romans in order to get him executed, but the Romans weren't interested in Jewish law, so they would have done it on the grounds that Jesus might be in danger of leading a Jewish revolt.

That's why Mark goes to such lengths to argue that Jesus wasn't a military messiah. He was writing before the Romano-Jewish war, and wanted to avoid accusations of a Jewish uprising.

 

[selfinflikted]

... One of the best internet friends is possessed by demons but has a great deal of faith.

Wait a minute.. you actually believe in "demon possession"?

 

[Polycarp1]

The problem is one of prejudice. No, I'm not calling names; I mean the literal meaning of the word: pre-judging. "If you disagree with me, you must be doing it out of evil motives." It would be nice if everyone could see that that is not the case, at least much of the time. To be sure, there's more than a little trolling or defiant hatred -- but neither a Christian nor a secularist humanist should be giving in to hatred.

I think the typical conservative Christian is, generally, acting out of the best motives: seeing someone else who is, in their opinion, subscribing to falsehood and in danger of condemnation, and wanting, out of a real sense of caring, to figuratively kick them in the fundament and get them straightened out.

But what they themselves don't get is that the typical liberal, Christian or otherwise, is likewise acting out of good motives -- trying to apply the teachings of Jesus on how to respond to your fellow man, and attempting to call out those whom they see acting like judgmental Pharisees instead of embracing in Christian love.

Maybe if we can all try to see through the eyes of others, instead of drawing factional lines, we might actually change hearts and minds. And, in the last analysis, isn't that what we're setting out to do?