Christians don't "warn" people of god's judgement, they "threaten" people with god's judgement.

by JonathanH 41 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Searril

  Now if you run around with signs saying kill all fags, that is another story. Unfortunately people will tend to globally label every christian and treat them unkind accordingly. You will see a lot of references to extremist religious groups from here on out; have a sense of humour about it and remember what I said. ;)

  I agree with you that that type of nonsense is ridiculous and certainly not Christian behavior. It is no different from the hard leftwingers who would wear signs saying "Bush = Hitler" or some of the stupid things PETA comes up with for the shock factor. It's all garbage and nonsense.

  I have never personally seen anyone outside of the Watchtower Society religion who has shown actual joy at the thought of the slaughter of masses of humanity.

  I do know a lot on here do not believe in God, and I am sorry to see it. I do know that I personally wanted nothing to do with God or religion for a long time after escaping from the Watchtower Society. I also felt for a time that the stuff in the bible was mostly myth and could not possibly be true. So maybe that causes me to be more sympathetic towards those who no longer have any faith in God. I see how those who believe here are ridiculed by those who don't. I don't hate them for acting that way, because I carried a lot of bitterness with me for a long time as well. It's natural when you've been burned by a controlling cult like the Watchtower Society. But that's also why I don't really post much because I know that, as a Christian and a believer in God, ears here will naturally be turned off towards anything I have to say, and I know that if I claim to believe in something that bible says I would be mocked if I can't answer every question posed from a scientific perspective. I readily admit I don't have all the answers, so there's not much point in trying to look for them with others who have already made up their minds.

  And again, please don't take any of this as an attack or condemnation. I would only be condemning myself. Because I was there once. And to this day I still think long and hard on things and search myself to try to find out what I truly believe -- to try to make sense of things and to look for anything that does make sense. I am not an example for anyone. I'm a very rough work in progress, but I am still searching and am sufficiently aware of my limitations to know that I have very few real answers.
• 

  NewChapter

  Do I seem delighted at the thought of you being brutalized?

  Searril--I don't know actually. When I posted that, I was thinking of some specific people in my life that had said these things to me. I have no problem with the rest, but when posting here, like Shamus said, it does feel like generalizations when we are speaking about the extremists---or just certain types of people. I have had quite a few Christians seem absolutely delighted that hell awaited me, or others that didn't do things this way.

  And since you called me out, and perhaps rightfully so, allow me to point something out to you.

  Well, neither the Westboro Baptish Church nor the Watchtower Society are Christian organizations

  Why do you get to say this? They say they are chrisitans. Who gets to define it? Look, there are plenty of atheists I'd like to say aren't really atheists, because their actions embarrass and disturb me, but it is what it is. We all have loons in the closet. We can't just say they are 'really' Christians, or they aren't 'really' atheists, or to use a metaphor another poster is fond of, 'they aren't true scotsmen'.

  NC
• 

  JonathanH

  A couple of points.

  1) Searril, you said vinny could incite his buddy to do violence, and you cannot. That is irrelevant. Simply add a sentence to the beginning of my example where Vinny's buddy says "Hey vinny, look at those queers over there. I really dislike queers. I mean, they need to just not exist." and the problem is fixed. Vinny isn't inciting anything, he is merely condoning the views of his sociopathic friend. If the language offends, just make Vinny more polite and give him a cheery british accent. His message remains the same. "You need to change, or my friend is going to harm you, and I am happy about that."

  2) The lovey "we are all sinners" line also doesn't make a difference. If you believe that there will be some form of judgment, and that non-christians, and those that do not have any interest in abiding by an arbitrary list of rules (or in christian language, people "willfully sinning") will be judged against and there will be negative consequences for that judgment, and you condone this, then any warning given is a warning under the second definition.

  This can only be reconciled in the mind in one of three ways.

  a)Fuzzy reasoning. Simply claim that whatever god does is right, and you don't know what will happen, but it will be right. This is a cop out used so that no critical evaluation of the set of beliefs is necessary.

  b) Redefine christianity so broadly that it becomes a form of deism+ambiguously important Jesus. In this way one can say that god isn't going to punish hindu's just because they are polytheistic demon worshippers, or Muslims and Jews for rejecting christ. Because they are trying, and some of them are good people. But that essentially is just the "all paths lead to god" approach with a condoscending addition of "but my path is still way better than yours." It is also closely related to solution (a), except it goes far enough to realize mass slaughter is wrong, but doesn't want to spend much more time trying to figure out how far back the line needs to be pushed so that god doesn't look like a sociopath.

  or c) Just up and disagree with the god of the bible. Realize that something like homosexuality isn't an abomination, and that coercion by violence is never ok, even if (and especially if) you are the grand pubah of the universe.
• 

  ziddina

  Thanks for addressing that comment, New Chapter...

  I was debating whether it would do any good to reply to his objections...
• 

  tec

  We can't just say they are 'really' Christians, or they aren't 'really' atheists, or to use a metaphor another poster is fond of, 'they aren't true scotsmen'.

  But you can say that someone is not really an atheist if they believe in some form of a creator/god/supreme being, etc.

  In the same way, if someone is acting in opposition to Christ and His teachings, then we can say that they are not following Christ. (I prefer that, rather than stating someone is or is not a Christian, simply because we can see someone's actions... but we cannot always see someone's annointing... that is for Christ and God to say, not us)

  Peace,

  Tammy
• 

  Black Sheep

  "In the first sense, one gives a warning to prevent an outcome that is undesirable"

  This is a veiled threat, Tim. To prevent the outcome requires action on my part. My non-action to prevent will, supposedly, result in whatever outcome the particular cult is warning about.
• 

  Searril

  They say they are chrisitans.

  If I claim to be a Martian does that mean I really am one? Or would I have to possess and display the qualities of someone from Mars in order for it to be true and believable?
• 

  Searril

  Jonathan, no offense intended, but your post is the perfect example of what I didn't want the conversation to turn into. Too many threads on the internet devolve into a litany of "mini-points" where each person has to spend time dissecting each and every sentence of the other to point out the precise points he doesn't agree with. You'll probably say it's a cop-out, but I'm just not interested in that type of tiresome nitpicking each other's statements to death.

  I think it's pretty apparent that your analogy is woefully lacking and does not hold up under a bit of scrutiny. It is a simple fact that I cannot threaten anyone when I have no power to affect, or cause a chain of events to put into effect, whatever happens to that person. That is simple logic and true.

  Clearly you and I will never agree on what the message of the bible is and whether or not God has the right to do what he does, so is there really a point in my dissecting everything you say to rebut this or that?
• 

  NewChapter

  If I claim to be a Martian does that mean I really am one? Or would I have to possess and display the qualities of someone from Mars in order for it to be true and believable?

  Were you born on Mars? Were your parents martians?

  But if a person reads the bible, preaches what is in it, and follows the teachings of Christ as they understand them, who are you to say whether they are a chrisitian or not? If I were a Martian, and I didn't like the way you, a fellow Martian was acting----perhaps you like to eat brains---I don't get to say your aren't REALLY a Martian.

  I simply find it amusing when believers dismiss other believers to save themselves the discomfort of being classified with people that they don't agree with.

  And what are JW's and the Campdroids doing that is so UN Christian? Preaching the end? Preaching destruction? That sounds very Christian to me, as the bible is full of such preaching. Perhaps it is YOU who are not the Christian, because you aren't out there threatening and warning, and carrying on and disturbing the peace. First century Christians certainly did---why aren't you imitating them?

  I know it's probably uncomfortable to see the negative fruits of Christ's teachings---especially if you simply want to focus on the positives. But really, a Christian focusing on the judgement and the destruction is no less valid on the one focusing on the love and the forgiveness.

  So as far as I'm concerned, those Christians do possess and display the qualities of first century disciples, therefore I will not challenge their self identification as Christians.

  The bible is full of bloodshed, ethnic cleansing, rape, oppression, lying, and slavery---and those are the good guys.

  NC
• 

  tec

  and follows the teachings of Christ as they understand them,

  Well, I could say that I am a law-abider if I follow the law of the land as I understand it, but unless I understand that law correctly, then I am actually a law-breaker.

  Ignorance of the law might e x cuse me from the consequences of having broken the law (depending upon my accuser and judge), but it doesn't change that I did not, in fact, abide by the law.

  And what are JW's and the Campdroids doing that is so UN Christian? Preaching the end? Preaching destruction? That sounds very Christian to me, as the bible is full of such preaching. Perhaps it is YOU who are not the Christian, because you aren't out there threatening

  and warning, and carrying on and disturbing the peace. First century Christians certainly did---why aren't you imitating them?

  Well, the WB Baptists preach hate. They are judgmental, stating that so and so deserves to be punished, to burn in hell, to die, to suffer, etc, etc. They certainly are not blessing and loving their enemies, as Christ taught us to do. Nor are we supposed to rejoice over the misfortune of our enemies; and they do just that.

  I simply find it amusing when believers dismiss other believers to save themselves the discomfort of being classified with people that they don't agree with.

  People want Muslims to stand up against the fundamentalists in their religion, and denounce their actions... but if a christian denounces the actions of a fundamentalist group who is going against the teachings of Christ then that is somehow different? It probably would be the same if the Muslims did the same thing. It seems sometimes that people would rather believe the worst, rather than the best. Even knowing that man has and continues to take something good and peaceful and turn it into something ugly. When someone does that, then those who are of peace SHOULD denounce them as the truth they claim to be.

  Peace,

  Tammy