Are Christians harmless?

by gumby 245 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

LittleToe

Gumby:
I think you're using the word "convert" when you mean "proselytise". It's a common misuse of the word.
I could proselytise your sheep, but I couldn't convert it into Britney Spears.
James:I'm going to express myself from my own experience. From the many discussions I've had on this subject, with Christians, it appears to be pretty common and stands in contrast to your statements.
Why do people join a specific religion?
Usually because that style of worship suits them more.
They join because they are afraid and believe their chosen religion is the righteous way; God's way. Or why join at all?
Ermm, maybe some like to worship communally, as well as at home? Why should everything be fear based?
Humans are gregarious in nature. Why do some go to a movie theater instead of just rent?
They believe, as members, they are now somehow different, somehow separate from those who do not believe. Or why believe at all?
I don't think you'll find that that is the reason they believe at all.
You're argument appears to be that people believe so that they can be different from others. IMHO that's a fallacy that is putting the symptom before the cause.
It's also a very human preoccupation to distinguish ourselves from the rest of the human race. We like to excel, whether or not we do so as a pandering to the ego, or not. Using your own "framework", don't you still set goals and strive to create quality?
Religion is an ego trip. A way of separating and elevating the personal "me" to a higher level that we believe is somehow more acceptable to God.
Maybe to some nominal Christians, or "works based" groups like the JW's. However IMHO many are there to "worship". It's about elevating a deity, and simultaniously submitting the ego.
War and suffering would end.
I'm sorry to say this, but that sounds kinda naive.
IMHO man would just find something else to fight about, like oil reserves...
Flyin:
No one is indicting Christians, we are discussing whether or not they are harmless.

Seems to me that if the conclusion is that "Christians are harmful", then that's an indictment.
It seems a generalisation, with mainly historic roots, to me.
ozziepost

LT:
My felicitation, old son - or should that be commiserations?? I see you're still here - me, I've been to work, come home, and it's still going!!!
Could I correct a teensy weensy statement? Ta. It's this one:
Why do people join a specific religion?
Usually because that style of worship suits them more.
It's not that I think there's anything wrong with your answer - it's just that the question's wrong!
It goes like this: The dubs have been indoctrinated to such a degree that they cannot see past "the Organisation" and so any association becomes an organisation. Not only that but they cannot conceive of an individual having a one-on-one with the Father.
So we get Dub-influenced questions like "Why do people join a specific religion?" when the proper question should ask why they join or associate with a particular denomination. There's a world of difference between the two questions. It's likely that christians are to be found in many churches, fellowship or whatever group they may choose to attend.
Personally, I've fellowshiped with different styles of worship but presently associate with a "conservative" established style of fellowship. I'm not committed to that permanently but believe that God has placed me there for a reason (and that's another story!).
As you so aptly point out, some christians decide to meet in private homes. Actually some of our neighbours do just that. Oh, the dubs would never comprehend that, would they?
Cheers, Ozzie
funkyderek

LT:
I don't know what you're getting at.
You surely know that I condemn the Spanish Inquisition and stake burnings.
Of course. I was more interested in jschwehm's answer - but he seems to have left the thread
FlyingHighNow

Seems to me that if the conclusion is that "Christians are harmful", then that's an indictment.
It seems a generalisation, with mainly historic roots, to me.

I don't think all Christians are harmful. I said so. Maybe the question would better if it asked: Is Christianity harmless? Christianity as presented by most churches and JWs is a fear based religion. Love God or fear his wrath. Love God or go to hell. Not exactly inspiration for stability.
If the thread title was: does Chrisitanity always inspire harmless behavior, would you take this thread so personally? It might be better to look at everything objectively.
Having the hell scared out of oneself isn't always going to inspire stable reactions. And again, I am stating that not every single Christian is unstable. Christianity is not the only fear based religion that produces tragic results. Islam encourages some pretty radical behavior, too.
Maybe we could call this thread: Are fear based religions harmless?
I don't call myself a Christian because I am confused about which parts of the Bible are man's words and which are God's words. I do not believe a lot of what churches teach about the Bible. I hope somehow Jesus really did come to save us. But if he did, I don't believe he only came to save Christians or people who convert to Christianity. Maybe Jesus came to tell us there is hope for life beyond death. Maybe his sole purpose in being here was to let us know that when we die it's not forever. Maybe he came to expose religious hypocrisy and probably that is why he was murdered. He didn't have to come to try to put the fear into most of us. He must have known that almost every person on earth already feared death, so why come and add more fear by threatening to send people to hell?
Flyin'
gumby

I don't think all Christians are harmful. I said so. Maybe the question would better if it asked: Is Christianity harmless?

Actually I REALLY wished I had asked the question a bit different . It would have been better to ask............."Are ALL christians harmful"?
My point in starting this thread was because of my feelings that ALL christians are NOT harmful. I do not see LT, Ozzie, and those like them, harmfull in any way shape or form.( except for LT cuz he now knows karate and stuff)
I'm glad this thread has shown many that christians should not all be lumped into one group because of their title. Because wars were fought in the name of christianity does not mean that all christians honor those wars.....but rather are repulsed by them. I'm glad this point was stressed here.
Gumby
LittleToe

Ozzie:
Personally, I've fellowshiped with different styles of worship but presently associate with a "conservative" established style of fellowship. I'm not committed to that permanently but believe that God has placed me there for a reason (and that's another story!).

Aye, that was a point I thought about, as I pondered this thread (after I'd posted). Unfortunately I was too busy to amend it.
Flyin:
I think you've made a good point in emphasising a major issue; that being that Christians get lumped with denominations, which in turn get lumped with the entire history of Christendom.
Gumby:
See now, there ya go again lumping folks together again.
I practice TaiChi and Aikido, which are generally acknowledged as Martial Arts (TaiChi from China and Aikido from Japan), however I've never practiced Karate or the more violent Martial Arts, in my life.
Should I get accused of being associated with chopping people's heads off during the age of the Samurai, of feudal Japan?
JamesThomas

Ross,

It would indeed be naive to think the the end of religious beliefs would end war and suffering; however what was said included the end of a belief in a "me" who joins. This, changes the equation drastically.

It is the identification with a "me", a separate entity in search of wholeness, which finds a need and warmth in defending it's religion. it defends and cherishes it's religion for it has incorporated certain religious beliefs into it's own identity. To lose it's-beliefs, it's identity, would be like a death, so it fights for whatever it believes in. This is just the way it is.

If and when there is deep investigation into this "me", it can be discovered undeniably that the me is but a facade, a tight weave of memories, thoughts, beliefs and ideas. The me is realized to be but a concept.

When the "me" is seen through, what sees remains untouched. Not so much like here still is a "me" that is seeing, but rather there is SEEING, there is HEARING, there is LIFE-ING, and I am that. When there is no me, there is everything, and I am that. Why make war for oil, when I would be making war only with myself?
LittleToe

James:
Thanks for clarifying that. I was misreading the intent of your post.
JamesThomas

No problem Ross.

It is difficult to express what can not be; and easy to become offended or defensive when someone seems to be saying that the "you" that is believed to be -- does not exist; and so all that is cherished by it -- is likewise questionable as well.

Take away everything that can be taken away, and what remains is Eternally-true/real/actual (what the word "God" points to).

Imagine all that is incorporated into a personal, separate identity: All that is remembered from the past, all the thoughts, pictures, beliefs, feelings and emotions which makeup the entire story of me-and-my-relationship-to-the-rest-of-the-universe. There is, understandably, a deep sense of value placed upon all this; and there comes to be a very solid and concrete image or entity seemingly existing here in which is found a sense of security and ownership. To question it is insane. To question it is suicide. One would have to be a fool.

However, if there is foolishness enough, like it or not, it can be seen that all this identification can in fact be taken away.

It can be unequivocally realized that it is all just a great imagined cloud or dance upon the pristine and endless Sky which looks out those eyes -- even now.
frankiespeakin

A while back I went to a penticostal church and before I knew it they had me going to all kinds of meetings and praying in tongues and useing up a lot of my time,, not as bad as the JWs,, but a big chunck of my time just the same(about 4 hours a week average), next they wanted me to tithe and made me feel bad that I wasn't giving enough to help the church pay it's bills. I had a hard time breaking free but finally did after about 6 months. JWD was helpfull to me in that reguard,, because once I realized jehovah and jesus were a big fat myth I no longer went, thanks JWD.
These people prayed for the american troupes in Iraq, for victory,,and they also tried to get me and others to get enovled in prayer for certain polititions that were of acceptable moral chartactor,, they just sent me an email about fighting some gay movie that pictures jesus as gay,,they actively oppose gay rights.
So while many may be like some on this board and not be so proactive for the Bible and it's morals,,there are many that feel God is on their side and that the Bible should be followed by all and if someone don't follow the Bible they are not worthy of life,, similar to the JWs and how they view worldly people, or Df'd persons. Now these types of people or beliefs are really harmfull,,thier leaders are even more harmful because of the influence they have over their flocks. And we all know of horror stories about how bad a "true beleiver" can be once he feel God is on his side and that God condems a certain person or act.
So while we should not over react to beleivers,,we can see the inherit dangers of christianity from this as well as from history to be a little bit negative in such a belief system,,some christians seeing the dangers are trying to change the christian beleif to be more gentler,, with God being all Lovey Dovey and not the mean old jehovah of the Bible,, That's not too bad,, but why bother beleiving in jesus in the first place if you have to reject the bible where the belief came from.

Are Christians harmless?

Share this