JillUser JillUser

Nonchristian vs Antichristian

▼

Nonchristian vs Antichristian

There's a big difference

from JoeUser Forums

I think everyone who doesn't consider themselves christian has gotten accused of being antichristian at one time or another.  I have gotten accused many times.  Ironically the accusers are people with some sort of martyr complex who assume that they will be persecuted for being christian.  They take issue with me in anticipation of my taking issue with them.

I am not denying that there are plenty of people on the planet who actually are antichristian.  I just find it odd when I or some of the kindest people I know have been labeled as such.  It isn't a 'you're either with me or against me' subject. 

I am also perplexed as to why so many christians can't fathom anyone believing in God without believing Jesus is his son.  I can understand why they can believe in Jesus not because it makes sense to me but because I am open minded and realize that other people have different experiences in life than what I have experienced in my own.  Those experiences help form how we see the world and how we fit in it.  If you see only your path, your way as being the only way, then you are not open minded.

religion
19,414 views 173 replies
Reply #76 from JoeUser Forums Top

Sorry, Jill--this comment is going to be off topic, so you won't hurt my feelings if you delete it.


No problem Shades. I never mind when bloggers have kind interactions on my threads. I wouldn't mind hearing the answer to that question myself.
Reply #77 from JoeUser Forums Top
Just as a note about where I stand on things myself, I am not an expert on any subject. The only thing I know more about than any other person is my own life. I cannont and will not ever say anyone is wrong when it comes to religion. I only know what my heart and mind have told me based on what I have experienced in my 35yrs of life.
Fences - Organize your desktop icons today!
Reply #78 from JoeUser Forums Top

Leauki--Based on your knowledge on this thread and a couple of others I've read recently, I am curious if you ever formally studied religion/theology. I know you said you've read the Bible and the Koran--but your breadth of knowledge is quite remarkable. I'm very impressed.


I have some formal exposure to Judaism in shul. I might get into more detail in an article on my blog much later. This is not the time.

I have never formally studied theology. I do read a lot. And I think of myself as well-educated in general, not only in religion. You learn a lot when you move from one country to another. It's automatic.

Religion was also a subject in school where I grew up. And I guess I learned a lot there without noticing it. It helped that I learned Latin for eight years. You wouldn't believe what a conservative German Latin teacher teaches you over the years!

I also read many books about libertarianism (doctrine of free will, not the political party) and use every opportunity to discuss religion with people of other faiths (a friend of mine here in Dublin is becoming a Catholic priest at the moment, we have had many good debates).

But, to be honest, I am very often unsure. And I always ask my rabbi or a good friend here in Dublin who actually studied "Hebrew Studies" when I am.

I suppose Liberal Judaism does that to you.
Reply #79 from JoeUser Forums Top
Thanks for the answer Leauki--I'll keep a look out on your blog for more details. Like I said, I'm very impressed by how much you seem to understand the various religions.
Reply #80 from JoeUser Forums Top
BenUser's point stands--it's when you think that your way is the only way that it gets annoying.


Oh, so calling my faith a "myth" is what counts for "tolerance" now? Thanks, shades, for further underscoring my point.
Reply #81 from JoeUser Forums Top
Gid, that is an emotional response. I understand the response but try to take an objective look at what he said.


I DID take an objective look at what he said, Jill. It wasn't simply an emotional response.

You're talking about the difference between a nonChristian and an AntiChristian, and your article is concise and well written. He boldly proclaims his liberal appreciation for our right to believe in our religious faiths by 1) equating them with children's fairy stories; 2) labelling them as myths. To use an analogy, it would be the same as making the statement on abortion (I HAVE made this statement, and everytime I did so, it was DELIBERATELY to provoke a response) that: "I reserve your right to murder your baby". In that statement of "tolerance", I am expressing an entirely INTOLERANT viewpoint to the practice, as is Ben in his similarly backhanded comments. I have read enough of his writing to know that his comparisons were not a mistake, not a misstatement, but that he understands his analogies well enough to have drawn them deliberately.
Reply #82 from JoeUser Forums Top
While Jesus was indeed Jewish, he was not a descendant of David. That was a myth created by Christians to help make their case that Jesus was the messiah.


Has everyone missed this entirely. Here's an interesting thought, that someone who does NOT believe in the virgin birth would use the virgin birth to disprove the claim to Christ being the Messiah.

Things that make you go hmmmm....
Reply #83 from JoeUser Forums Top
Where did you get this info Marcie? Everything I have ever read says that it is doubtful they ever even met.


Actually, it is POSSIBLE that they met, but if they ever did, it was most likely because Paul was a member of a group of religious leaders that was persecuting Christ. But your point stands. He wasn't even remotely part of Christ's "inner circle".
Reply #84 from JoeUser Forums Top
The reading that I have done regarding Paul brings me to agree with BenUser again


I would say yes and no on that. BenUser's statement, while not entirely accurate, DOES sum up the traditional teachings of some sects on the writings of the apostle Paul. But even this is open to heavy debate within the church itself; for as many teachings of Paul as you can find that support the concept of "grace alone", you can find an equal number that support the concept that works must be present in the lives of the believer.

But I would agree Ben is more right than wrong on this point, because the teachings in many "Christian" churches do center FAR more heavily on the writings of Paul than the rest of the bible, or even the New Testament. they are more "Pauline" in nature than "Christian.
Reply #85 from JoeUser Forums Top
He boldly proclaims his liberal appreciation for our right to believe in our religious faiths by 1) equating them with children's fairy stories; 2) labelling them as myths.


I will concede that in point 1) he used Santa and the Tooth fairy in order to be condescending. But I stick to point 2) without faith, christianity is myth. Sorry, but that is a fact.

I do believe that acts such as not allowing people to display the nativity or say "Merry Christmas" without offending are the acts of Antichristians.

Calling someone an idiot or otherwise suggesting they are inferior in any way merely because they are christian is antichristian. Not sharing the faith or debating what's written in the bible is not antichristian.
Reply #86 from JoeUser Forums Top
Calling someone an idiot or otherwise suggesting they are inferior in any way merely because they are christian is antichristian.


And my point is that Ben is implicitly doing just that. While you are correct in saying that without faith, Christianity is a myth (the same could be said of many beliefs held by nonChristians, I might point out), the verbiage of his statement was EXTREMELY condescending. Would it not have been just as fair and reasonable to say "or other BELIEFS"?

Ben's statement made his contempt for believers in Christianity patently clear. He is essentially saying "I support your right to be an idiot", and in doing so, is exhibiting an antiChristian viewpoint.
Reply #87 from JoeUser Forums Top
Gid:

Having read your comment on your other thread I have choosen to erase my initial response to you. That said, I don't really think that I can demonstrate your point about how anti-Christians behave, since I'm actually Christian. I tend to think that my fellow Christians are a little sensitive when their faith is challenged. Obviously, Jill made this point better than I did, but yes, I think for nonChristians belief in the resurrection is a myth--it's like Never, Neverland or make believe.

I am not a big fan of people throwing around the world "tolerance" when they don't seem to be demonstrating an awful lot themselves. You were just as intolerant (in my opinion) of BenUser's views as you think he was of yours. It appears you've had past run ins with him--I have not, so I merely read what he wrote at face value. I did not find it condescending at all.
Reply #88 from JoeUser Forums Top
because the teachings in many "Christian" churches do center FAR more heavily on the writings of Paul than the rest of the bible, or even the New Testament. they are more "Pauline" in nature than "Christian.


Gid this is so true. But these are the same people who seem to run around with the WWJD garb too. Yet they call me the hypocrite which is quite ironic. Jesus' teaching are pretty simple and Paul's are quite complex in his style of writing. It appears to me that man in it's feeble mind has a inferiority complex and tries to understand the complex issues rather than dwelling on what is straightforward and simple. Either that or we take the simple, make it complex and become legalistic.
Reply #89 from JoeUser Forums Top
double post
Reply #90 from JoeUser Forums Top
I am not a big fan of people throwing around the world "tolerance" when they don't seem to be demonstrating an awful lot themselves. You were just as intolerant (in my opinion) of BenUser's views as you think he was of yours.


where is the line between disagreement and intolerance? Is it when you can no longer agree to disagree?
Reply #91 from JoeUser Forums Top
where is the line between disagreement and intolerance? Is it when you can no longer agree to disagree?


The definition of intolerant is: Unwilling to tolerate differences in opinions, practices, or beliefs, especially religious beliefs.

I think that when you start calling someone who doesn't agree with what you think a 'hypocrite' or antiChristian, you are demonstrating intolerance. BenUser's point was basically, "do whatever you want to do, just don't preach at me." Seems pretty tolerant to me.

I don't have to agree with something to be tolerant of it. Here's a good example. When I was in school, one of the students decided to wear a Nazi uniform to class. Our principal, who was Jewish, took this as a great way to teach by example. He told us that while he didn't agree with the student, the student had the right to express himself and therefore the wearing of the Nazi uniform would be tolerated. He didn't agree, he simply didn't prohibit. That's what tolerance is.
Reply #92 from JoeUser Forums Top
Well put Shades.

Gid, we will have to agree to disagree on Ben. Like I said, I agree that he has a way of being condescending. I feel condescended all the time by christians who tell me that I'm not christian merely because I'm not truly seeking or basically I haven't done my homework on the subject. I couldn't even tell you how many times christians have told me "I was just like you ___ yrs ago until I learned the truth".

As far as tolerance goes, I think that homosexuality is disgusting and unnatural but would never judge someone merely because they are homosexual. Am I intolerant? Am I Anti-gay?
Reply #93 from JoeUser Forums Top
I think that when you start calling someone who doesn't agree with what you think a 'hypocrite' or antiChristian, you are demonstrating intolerance.


No a hypocrite is completely different.

And I was asking a rhetorical question. Guess I wasn't very persuasive.

I think that homosexuality is disgusting and unnatural but would never judge someone merely because they are homosexual. Am I intolerant? Am I Anti-gay?


No Jill, because you are able to agree to disagree. As long as you are not forcing your point of view on them. I see my rhetorical questions were not seen as rhetoric.
Reply #94 from JoeUser Forums Top
Where did you get this info Marcie? Everything I have ever read says that it is doubtful they ever even met. Paul even persecuted christians until he had a vision of Jesus on a journey to Damascus.

I think you're right, Jill. If you look at the book of Acts, Paul details specific events that led up to his conversion (one of them being Stephen's death) and I think it would be out of character for him to NOT mention meeting Jesus if he had. Besides... there were some questioning the authenticity of his apostleship. I always believed that was because he hadn't physically been with Jesus. In 1 Cor. 15:8 Paul is recording Jesus' appearing to the apostles and says this about himself: "Then last of all he was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time." That's what I take that to mean... that he wasn't walking with Jesus before the ascension... not until that day on the road to Damascus. We can't know for sure, of course, so it's all speculation.

Most know that I consider myself to be a conservative evangelical Christian. Jesus did say, "He who is not with me is against me," so I can see where the "us vs. them" mentality comes from... but I also remember the scripture that says my battle is not against flesh and blood, but is a spiritual one. Satan is my enemy, not someone that holds to a different belief system than I do. It's important to keep that in focus. I don't ever want to be the cause of someone deciding against Christ. In my mind, that would be worse than leading noone TO Him. I do take the responsibility of sharing my faith seriously. I believe I'm called to participate in the Great Commission... I just don't think that beating people over the head with it is the best way to "win friends and influence people." I will never deny my God. I won't hide my faith.... and given the opporunity to share what Christ means to me -- I'll take it without hesitation... but I'm not going to degrade others for believing something different. Instead I choose to pray. It's a more powerful tool than anything that might come out of my mouth (or fingers).

Nice article, Jill. I agree with you. Not everyone who is not Christian is "anti-Christian", at least in the sense we generally think of. I think we're all searching... I see that as a good thing. I pray we all find the answers we seek.
Reply #95 from JoeUser Forums Top
Jesus did say, "He who is not with me is against me," so I can see where the "us vs. them" mentality comes from...


I know SO many Christians who look down upon the Saducees and Pharisees for their legalistic views but I see the very same traits from them. Bottom line have FAITH in G-D. Period.

It seems to me that we know the road but we are arguing which side of the road we should drive on. How fast we should go.
Reply #97 from JoeUser Forums Top
It's namecalling. That's my point.


Okay point taken. Thanks for clarifying
Reply #98 from JoeUser Forums Top
No Jill, because you are able to agree to disagree. As long as you are not forcing your point of view on them. I see my rhetorical questions were not seen as rhetoric.


Ironic, you complained about your rhetorical questions not seen as rhetoric in the same paragraph as you answered my rhetorical questions. I asked those questions not because I needed them answered rather to make a point about intolerance.
Reply #99 from JoeUser Forums Top
Nice article, Jill. I agree with you. Not everyone who is not Christian is "anti-Christian", at least in the sense we generally think of. I think we're all searching... I see that as a good thing. I pray we all find the answers we seek.


Thanks for the kind comment HC. Thanks also for adding the info about St. Paul.
Reply #100 from JoeUser Forums Top

think that my Christian way is the only way to "heaven"...does that make me not open minded? I don't think so. I think every religion has that belief...



The Jewish religion specifically says that non-Jews can go to heaven (or new earth or whatever you want to call it) if they are good people. The laws of the Bible apply only to Jews. A Jew has to follow them to go to heaven, a non-Jew does

I am Christian, and I dont think it is my way or the hiway.  But then I guess that is my Jewish Roots coming through.