...
My sentiments... exactly.
Christianity would not get such a bad rap if Christians weren't such hypocrites. Take a lesson from Jesus and treat the poor and the lost with compassion, instead of distain and indifference... try reading the Sermon From The Mount, again... learn from it instead of stashing it in memory. Try forgiveness instead of vengence. Try acceptance, rather than disgust.
Nice post.
Thanks. My wife does Jail Ministry every week, and you'd be surprised (or maybe not) at the number of church goers who look down on her for doing this. They ask her why she would do it, and how they are nothing but druggies, thieves and murderers. I guess it never fails to stun her at the arrogance people show. She doesn't do it for pride, but because she feels called to do it. She doesn't go in there preaching hell-fire and brimstone, she becomes an ear for these people. She explains to them that even when the world has cast them out, God is still there wanting a relationship with them....regardless of their crime. She never knows how these people turn out later on, and it started to really get to her. She just wanted to know if some of these people had changed, or did they end up back in jail, or were they even alive. I'll never forget just before Christmas, a young lady called my wife's name, and we turned around. I'd never seen her before, but she ran up to my wife with tears in her eyes, and hugged her. My wife recognized her, and also started crying. It was someone that had turned their life around, not because of my wife, but because my wife took the time to show her that her life could be better than it was. It was an amazing moment, that you simply had to see to truly appreciate. I'm super proud of my wife for doing this work.
...
My sentiments... exactly.
Christianity would not get such a bad rap if Christians weren't such hypocrites. Take a lesson from Jesus and treat the poor and the lost with compassion, instead of distain and indifference... try reading the Sermon From The Mount, again... learn from it instead of stashing it in memory. Try forgiveness instead of vengence. Try acceptance, rather than disgust.
Nice post.
Thanks. My wife does Jail Ministry every week, and you'd be surprised (or maybe not) at the number of church goers who look down on her for doing this. They ask her why she would do it, and how they are nothing but druggies, thieves and murderers. I guess it never fails to stun her at the arrogance people show. She doesn't do it for pride, but because she feels called to do it. She doesn't go in there preaching hell-fire and brimstone, she becomes an ear for these people. She explains to them that even when the world has cast them out, God is still there wanting a relationship with them....regardless of their crime. She never knows how these people turn out later on, and it started to really get to her. She just wanted to know if some of these people had changed, or did they end up back in jail, or were they even alive. I'll never forget just before Christmas, a young lady called my wife's name, and we turned around. I'd never seen her before, but she ran up to my wife with tears in her eyes, and hugged her. My wife recognized her, and also started crying. It was someone that had turned their life around, not because of my wife, but because my wife took the time to show her that her life could be better than it was. It was an amazing moment, that you simply had to see to truly appreciate. I'm super proud of my wife for doing this work.
We need more people like your wife in the world! That post gave me goosebumps.
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
Haha, I disagree with you here Byrnzie. I think the 'average American' (god I hate that phrase) is actually, more often than not, well-intentioned, albeit often a bit misguided thanks to... well, everything, from media, to consumerist culture, and blah blah blah. How many actually take time out of their day like Mr Mexican Bus Driver, unfortunately no where near enough, but I think you'd be surprised by some of the Americans you meet - I know I've been, living here and all.
But my post wasn't intended to bash Americans. I was thinking of so-called 'Christians' when I posted it, not Americans. The majority of people who call themselves Christians do nothing but sit on their money.
Bottom line is there are plenty of people all over that do good things for others and Byrnzie's post was way off the mark and unnecessary.
No it wasn't.
How many people - American or otherwise? - who earn a meagre wage head off into the streets at night to feed 75 homeless people out of their own pocket? I bet you won't see any millionaire t.v evangelist or his chest-thumping, S.U.V driving breathren doing as much.
Yeah, that's what I should have said, but I was thiking more of rich, developed countries, and America has more so-called Christians than anywhere else. Also, this thread is about a particular church based in America....so, you see....anyway.
Yeah, that's what I should have said, but I was thiking more of rich, developed countries, and America has more so-called Christians than anywhere else. Also, this thread is about a particular church based in America....so, you see....anyway.
you will only see what you want to, the reason you don't hear about people doing this is because those people don't celebrate it. I see these type of people everyday...if you work with the homeless you will see them...they are everywhere, and yes, people who drive SUV's do good things...I am very saddened by your outlook on wealthy people because of the few jackasses that you have seen or dealt with...prejudice is never a good thing. People who are wealthy do a lot of good things, why do you only focus on the bad?
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Let's just get back onto the topic of the thread and not get personal, ok?
Thanks.
You mean get back to the topic that the Westboro Baptist Cult is doing the Devil's work? That would mean we would all have to agree with each other again. :wtf:
Let's just get back onto the topic of the thread and not get personal, ok?
Thanks.
You mean get back to the topic that the Westboro Baptist Cult is doing the Devil's work? That would mean we would all have to agree with each other again. :wtf:
...
My sentiments... exactly.
Christianity would not get such a bad rap if Christians weren't such hypocrites. Take a lesson from Jesus and treat the poor and the lost with compassion, instead of distain and indifference... try reading the Sermon From The Mount, again... learn from it instead of stashing it in memory. Try forgiveness instead of vengence. Try acceptance, rather than disgust.
Nice post.
It's a point well made but we should not forget those on the exact opposite end--who take such hypocrites and generalize their doings with that of the message of a religion, thereby denouncing entire religions and religious people on the basis of 'since these religious people do something wrong, and have religion in common, it must be religion that drives them to do this'. and then those who are not religious who do something wrong, since they don't share a common religion, they are not doing it in the name of the same vicious and filthy iniquities as these religious peoples, but rather just because they're personally bad. thus, instead of grouping right qualities vs wrong qualities, such people group right vs wrong (the few bad apples) vs religion (the ultimate wrong). such people often have a gross misinterpretation of history just as those who misuse religion have a gross misinterpretation of their own faith. all should be denounced and such polarizing and inaccurate representations should be ignored.
...
My sentiments... exactly.
Christianity would not get such a bad rap if Christians weren't such hypocrites. Take a lesson from Jesus and treat the poor and the lost with compassion, instead of distain and indifference... try reading the Sermon From The Mount, again... learn from it instead of stashing it in memory. Try forgiveness instead of vengence. Try acceptance, rather than disgust.
Nice post.
It's a point well made but we should not forget those on the exact opposite end--who take such hypocrites and generalize their doings with that of the message of a religion, thereby denouncing entire religions and religious people on the basis of 'since these religious people do something wrong, and have religion in common, it must be religion that drives them to do this'. and then those who are not religious who do something wrong, since they don't share a common religion, they are not doing it in the name of the same vicious and filthy iniquities as these religious peoples, but rather just because they're personally bad. thus, instead of grouping right qualities vs wrong qualities, such people group right vs wrong (the few bad apples) vs religion (the ultimate wrong). such people often have a gross misinterpretation of history just as those who misuse religion have a gross misinterpretation of their own faith. all should be denounced and such polarizing and inaccurate representations should be ignored.
...
So, the point you are making is that people who will take the words and actions in the name of a religion should not be the overall representative of that religion, right? Does this mean we should stop blaming the entire religion of Islam for the fundamentalists who operate on the militant right wing of that religion?
...
Also... I never made any inferences that Rev. Phelps and his minions speak for all of Christianity. I am just asking the question... who is the one tasked to make the judgement call that he is a 'bad Christian'... or not a 'Real Christian'? Who has that authority and who granted them that privilege? If Rev. Phelps really loves Jesus in his heart... who am I (or anyone else) to judge? That's all I'm asking.
Yes... I thoroughly despise his methods and actions and believe he and his group manipulate the national media to get his point across. I believe the best way to counter his methods are to treat them with the comical clown show that they are... like the way the Comic Con geeks did last year.
...
Also, are Christians who support the Death Penalty good Christians? What about the ones who support war? Are the Christians that harbor so much hatred towards the poor, good Christians? What about the ones who hate the illegal aliens so much? I always thought Jesus' message was about peace and forgiveness... turning the other cheek and all. I thought Jesus cared for the poor and downtrodden... and loves all of Mankind... loving the little children, Red and Yellow, Black and White and all that jazz, not just the one's that are employed and of the same Nationality.
I'm not passing judgement on anyone because I have not been tasked to do so. I believe I need to judge myself and make an honest assessment of myself and how I live the lessons Jesus teaches me. I don't know who is a good Christian and who is a bad one. All I know is who I am and how I operate in this world... amongst humans... regardless of religion, race or nationality. I use the teachings of Jesus as a guidepost... even though I distance myself far away fron the Christian Church and in no way associate myself as a 'Christian'. I feel I do not need the filter of Church doctrine, interpretation
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
So, the point you are making is that people who will take the words and actions in the name of a religion should not be the overall representative of that religion, right? Does this mean we should stop blaming the entire religion of Islam for the fundamentalists who operate on the militant right wing of that religion?
what militant wing of Islam? islam has no militant wing, in fact it has no "wings". if you're talking about Al Qaeda's militant wing then that makes a bit more sense--Al Qaeda is an actual organization thus it has a militant wing. And no, you should not take the words or actions of individuals from the religion as representative and thereafter try to talk about the religion like you're a pro. If you want to discuss the religion, then you are obligated to rationally and genuinely STUDY IT as any other topic. Only then will you be able to see where such fundamentalists fit in the larger concept and history of the entire religion.
Also... I never made any inferences that Rev. Phelps and his minions speak for all of Christianity.
I never said you did.
I am just asking the question... who is the one tasked to make the judgement call that he is a 'bad Christian'... or not a 'Real Christian'? Who has that authority and who granted them that privilege? If Rev. Phelps really loves Jesus in his heart... who am I (or anyone else) to judge? That's all I'm asking
....
Also, are Christians who support the Death Penalty good Christians? What about the ones who support war? Are the Christians that harbor so much hatred towards the poor, good Christians? What about the ones who hate the illegal aliens so much? I always thought Jesus' message was about peace and forgiveness... turning the other cheek and all. I thought Jesus cared for the poor and downtrodden... and loves all of Mankind... loving the little children, Red and Yellow, Black and White and all that jazz, not just the one's that are employed and of the same Nationality.
I'm not passing judgement on anyone because I have not been tasked to do so. I believe I need to judge myself and make an honest assessment of myself and how I live the lessons Jesus teaches me. I don't know who is a good Christian and who is a bad one. All I know is who I am and how I operate in this world... amongst humans... regardless of religion, race or nationality. I use the teachings of Jesus as a guidepost... even though I distance myself far away fron the Christian Church and in no way associate myself as a 'Christian'. I feel I do not need the filter of Church doctrine, interpretation
I agree with that point just as I did earlier. But like I've said before, a learned scholar on the religion does have the ability and knowledge to give his opinion on whether or not they are representative of the religion. And I mean your points just get into the larger concept of what makes a good human? what makes a bad human? it makes no sense to speak of good christians and bad christians without speaking of genuine human virtues that should be obligatory to all people. to turn a discussion of virtue from humanistic to religious makes it seem as if you are trying to say all humans are inherently good until they turn to religion, then they have to choose between being a good religious person (i.e. taking all words in whatever holy text lightly) or a bad one (taking everything literally). I'm not saying you ARE saying that, but this is just a further example of how such arguments of black and white when it comes to religion are weak and just show poor knowledge of religion in general. I mean, religion is not just a holy text. many scientists and philosophers wrote text in the greater context of religion, it is very much involved in such discussions of virtue, so i'm not denying that. my only point is i find it strange when people, not necessarily you, separate religion and society as if one is the cause of the ills of the other, almost as if they are separating inequity from virtue.
what militant wing of Islam? islam has no militant wing, in fact it has no "wings". if you're talking about Al Qaeda's militant wing then that makes a bit more sense--Al Qaeda is an actual organization thus it has a militant wing. And no, you should not take the words or actions of individuals from the religion as representative and thereafter try to talk about the religion like you're a pro. If you want to discuss the religion, then you are obligated to rationally and genuinely STUDY IT as any other topic. Only then will you be able to see where such fundamentalists fit in the larger concept and history of the entire religion.
I agree with that point just as I did earlier. But like I've said before, a learned scholar on the religion does have the ability and knowledge to give his opinion on whether or not they are representative of the religion. And I mean your points just get into the larger concept of what makes a good human? what makes a bad human? it makes no sense to speak of good christians and bad christians without speaking of genuine human virtues that should be obligatory to all people. to turn a discussion of virtue from humanistic to religious makes it seem as if you are trying to say all humans are inherently good until they turn to religion, then they have to choose between being a good religious person (i.e. taking all words in whatever holy text lightly) or a bad one (taking everything literally). I'm not saying you ARE saying that, but this is just a further example of how such arguments of black and white when it comes to religion are weak and just show poor knowledge of religion in general. I mean, religion is not just a holy text. many scientists and philosophers wrote text in the greater context of religion, it is very much involved in such discussions of virtue, so i'm not denying that. my only point is i find it strange when people, not necessarily you, separate religion and society as if one is the cause of the ills of the other, almost as if they are separating inequity from virtue.
...
Your own words: "...you should not take the words or actions of individuals from the religion as representative and thereafter try to talk about the religion like you're a pro. If you want to discuss the religion, then you are obligated to rationally and genuinely STUDY IT as any other topic. Only then will you be able to see where such fundamentalists fit in the larger concept and history of the entire religion.
... But like I've said before, a learned scholar on the religion does have the ability and knowledge to give his opinion on whether or not they are representative of the religion."
...
So, according to you... the only ones who get to decide who a 'Good Christian/Bad Christian' is... are people who who are learned scholars of Christianity? Who is that... The Pope? Priests? Rev. Pat Robertson? You? Are you a learned scholar of religion? If you are, then what is the definition of a 'Good or Real Christian'? If you are not a learned scholar of religion... how do you know what I am asking is not a valid question? Why is it not a valid question?
The only question I am asking is about Christians and their religion. It has nothing to do with the society or human nature in general. Christians are supposed to know what a 'Good/Real Christian' is, right? Well, the Westboro Baptist Church are Christians... don't they get a say? If not, why not and who gets to make that call? That is why I question the person who claims to be Christian and supports war, hates the poor and is indifferent towards other humans says that the Phelps crew are not 'Real Christians'. Is it their call to make? If so, who gave them that role?
NOTE: I am not saying Westboro Baptist represents all of Christianity. But, they ARE a Christian Church, with their own interpretation... just like all of the other churches of Christianity.
...
On this point: "... to turn a discussion of virtue from humanistic to religious makes it seem as if you are trying to say all humans are inherently good until they turn to religion, then they have to choose between being a good religious person (i.e. taking all words in whatever holy text lightly) or a bad one (taking everything literally). I'm not saying you ARE saying that, but this is just a further example of how such arguments of black and white when it comes to religion are weak and just show poor knowledge of religion in general."
You are correct... I am NOT saying that. I am NOT inferring that religion makes a person good or bad... or that a lack of religion makes them good or bad. I am asking a specific question TO Christians... ABOUT Christians. They are supposed to know about Christianity. By casting judgement upon others (including those within theri own religion), aren't they going against their own tenent of not judging others? What does that make them... Good Christians... by going against their own teachings?
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
...
Your own words: "...you should not take the words or actions of individuals from the religion as representative and thereafter try to talk about the religion like you're a pro. If you want to discuss the religion, then you are obligated to rationally and genuinely STUDY IT as any other topic. Only then will you be able to see where such fundamentalists fit in the larger concept and history of the entire religion.
... But like I've said before, a learned scholar on the religion does have the ability and knowledge to give his opinion on whether or not they are representative of the religion."
...
So, according to you... the only ones who get to decide who a 'Good Christian/Bad Christian' is... are people who who are learned scholars of Christianity? Who is that... The Pope? Priests? Rev. Pat Robertson? You? Are you a learned scholar of religion? If you are, then what is the definition of a 'Good or Real Christian'? If you are not a learned scholar of religion... how do you know what I am asking is not a valid question? Why is it not a valid question?
The only question I am asking is about Christians and their religion. It has nothing to do with the society or human nature in general. Christians are supposed to know what a 'Good/Real Christian' is, right? Well, the Westboro Baptist Church are Christians... don't they get a say? If not, why not and who gets to make that call? That is why I question the person who claims to be Christian and supports war, hates the poor and is indifferent towards other humans says that the Phelps crew are not 'Real Christians'. Is it their call to make? If so, who gave them that role?
NOTE: I am not saying Westboro Baptist represents all of Christianity. But, they ARE a Christian Church, with their own interpretation... just like all of the other churches of Christianity.
...
On this point: "... to turn a discussion of virtue from humanistic to religious makes it seem as if you are trying to say all humans are inherently good until they turn to religion, then they have to choose between being a good religious person (i.e. taking all words in whatever holy text lightly) or a bad one (taking everything literally). I'm not saying you ARE saying that, but this is just a further example of how such arguments of black and white when it comes to religion are weak and just show poor knowledge of religion in general."
You are correct... I am NOT saying that. I am NOT inferring that religion makes a person good or bad... or that a lack of religion makes them good or bad. I am asking a specific question TO Christians... ABOUT Christians. They are supposed to know about Christianity. By casting judgement upon others (including those within theri own religion), aren't they going against their own tenent of not judging others? What does that make them... Good Christians... by going against their own teachings?
i think the heart of what you're getting at is great, and i completely agree that no one can judge the heart of another. on the other hand, i think we can judge whether or not an action, or teaching, is Christ-like and to that end i think anyone with a elementary knowledge of Jesus can see that Rev Phelps and his congregation's protesting and hate filled placards are NOT Christ-like. you're right, we shouldn't say anyone is a "good" or "bad" christian, that is a heart judgment which no one is qualified to make, but i think we can say that someone's actions are not Christ-like.
one question i have is what do you mean by "question" when you say "That is why I question the person who claims to be Christian and supports war, hates the poor and is indifferent towards other humans says that the Phelps crew are not 'Real Christians'"? i don't think this is your intent but that statement seems like the same judgment that those you are questioning make. if a Christian supports war they are a questionable Christian? i'm not meaning to provoke, i'm just not sure i understand what you're saying here.
...
Your own words: "...you should not take the words or actions of individuals from the religion as representative and thereafter try to talk about the religion like you're a pro. If you want to discuss the religion, then you are obligated to rationally and genuinely STUDY IT as any other topic. Only then will you be able to see where such fundamentalists fit in the larger concept and history of the entire religion.
... But like I've said before, a learned scholar on the religion does have the ability and knowledge to give his opinion on whether or not they are representative of the religion."
...
So, according to you... the only ones who get to decide who a 'Good Christian/Bad Christian' is... are people who who are learned scholars of Christianity? Who is that... The Pope? Priests? Rev. Pat Robertson? You? Are you a learned scholar of religion? If you are, then what is the definition of a 'Good or Real Christian'? If you are not a learned scholar of religion... how do you know what I am asking is not a valid question? Why is it not a valid question?
You keep moving this conversation backwards. I've already said several times that there is a difference between saying someone is a Good/Bad Christian, and saying that someone is not representative of the teachings of said religion. I am speaking strictly of the latter.
Now, when it comes to what makes someone a learned scholar of religion, it's really just someone, anyone who has studied it long enough - obviously what makes anyone a "scholar" is relative, there's no level to reach. All I am suggesting is that people should study something before talking about it. I don't think that's too much to ask.
As to whether or not you are asking a valid question, yes of course you are, but this is an issue that is discussed all the time. The general consensus is no, no one can judge another on whether or not is a good or bad christian or any other religion for that matter because the idea is that only God can accurately weigh people's intentions with their actions. that being said, I generally believe that intentions are not all that matter. So even if the WBC folks have good intentions in furthering Christ's teaching or whatever, their actions still matter, and their actions, as one would see by just a cursory review of the religion, do not fall in suit with, and in fact contradict, the teachings of the religion.
The only question I am asking is about Christians and their religion. It has nothing to do with the society or human nature in general. Christians are supposed to know what a 'Good/Real Christian' is, right? Well, the Westboro Baptist Church are Christians... don't they get a say? If not, why not and who gets to make that call? That is why I question the person who claims to be Christian and supports war, hates the poor and is indifferent towards other humans says that the Phelps crew are not 'Real Christians'. Is it their call to make? If so, who gave them that role?
NOTE: I am not saying Westboro Baptist represents all of Christianity. But, they ARE a Christian Church, with their own interpretation... just like all of the other churches of Christianity.
This brings me to my last point. This does have much to do with human virtue (or "nature" as you called it for some odd reason). Perhaps I didn't explain it well enough. I was using the analogy of judging what makes a 'good' human or a 'bad' human with this. At the end of the day, do we have what it takes to call someone a good human or a bad human? It's true that our perceptions of people's actions and assumptions of their intentions are all we have to base it off of, so in essence we can't TRULY judge whether one is a good human or a bad one. Not just that, but do we know what we're basing it off of? Like Christianity or any other religion for that matter, life and its virtues are part of an all-encompassing principle on how to act, perceive, think, etc. It's not just so simple to split into 2 categories of "if you believe in this, you're a good christian, if you believe in that, you're bad." it's much more complicated than that. if a human being supports the death penalty, does that make him bad? Well, for that, I'm sure you'd say it's more complicated. Because human virtue has more complications than a religion's rules, you may argue. So one can be a bad christian but a good human you may say. Well many Christians and religious people in general would disagree with such a contradiction. As in, you keep trying to separate what makes a good religious person from what makes a good human, whereas I am trying to explain that they are mutually inclusive, and just as one is impossible to judge so is the other. it is all just about how we try to bring those on the outside of our beliefs that we judge as wrong, whether they are unreligious pro-war fanatics, or religious death penalty advocates, closer to understand our point of view. some people do it by studying their religion and trying to bring them closer to their religious ideals while others simply advocate humanistic virtues that speak out against such things like war, etc. the reason both ways work is because both are as I've said mutual.
...
Your own words: "...you should not take the words or actions of individuals from the religion as representative and thereafter try to talk about the religion like you're a pro. If you want to discuss the religion, then you are obligated to rationally and genuinely STUDY IT as any other topic. Only then will you be able to see where such fundamentalists fit in the larger concept and history of the entire religion.
... But like I've said before, a learned scholar on the religion does have the ability and knowledge to give his opinion on whether or not they are representative of the religion."
...
So, according to you... the only ones who get to decide who a 'Good Christian/Bad Christian' is... are people who who are learned scholars of Christianity? Who is that... The Pope? Priests? Rev. Pat Robertson? You? Are you a learned scholar of religion? If you are, then what is the definition of a 'Good or Real Christian'? If you are not a learned scholar of religion... how do you know what I am asking is not a valid question? Why is it not a valid question?
The only question I am asking is about Christians and their religion. It has nothing to do with the society or human nature in general. Christians are supposed to know what a 'Good/Real Christian' is, right? Well, the Westboro Baptist Church are Christians... don't they get a say? If not, why not and who gets to make that call? That is why I question the person who claims to be Christian and supports war, hates the poor and is indifferent towards other humans says that the Phelps crew are not 'Real Christians'. Is it their call to make? If so, who gave them that role?
NOTE: I am not saying Westboro Baptist represents all of Christianity. But, they ARE a Christian Church, with their own interpretation... just like all of the other churches of Christianity.
...
On this point: "... to turn a discussion of virtue from humanistic to religious makes it seem as if you are trying to say all humans are inherently good until they turn to religion, then they have to choose between being a good religious person (i.e. taking all words in whatever holy text lightly) or a bad one (taking everything literally). I'm not saying you ARE saying that, but this is just a further example of how such arguments of black and white when it comes to religion are weak and just show poor knowledge of religion in general."
You are correct... I am NOT saying that. I am NOT inferring that religion makes a person good or bad... or that a lack of religion makes them good or bad. I am asking a specific question TO Christians... ABOUT Christians. They are supposed to know about Christianity. By casting judgement upon others (including those within theri own religion), aren't they going against their own tenent of not judging others? What does that make them... Good Christians... by going against their own teachings?
i think the heart of what you're getting at is great, and i completely agree that no one can judge the heart of another. on the other hand, i think we can judge whether or not an action, or teaching, is Christ-like and to that end i think anyone with a elementary knowledge of Jesus can see that Rev Phelps and his congregation's protesting and hate filled placards are NOT Christ-like. you're right, we shouldn't say anyone is a "good" or "bad" christian, that is a heart judgment which no one is qualified to make, but i think we can say that someone's actions are not Christ-like.
one question i have is what do you mean by "question" when you say "That is why I question the person who claims to be Christian and supports war, hates the poor and is indifferent towards other humans says that the Phelps crew are not 'Real Christians'"? i don't think this is your intent but that statement seems like the same judgment that those you are questioning make. if a Christian supports war they are a questionable Christian? i'm not meaning to provoke, i'm just not sure i understand what you're saying here.
...
What I am NOT doing, is trying to define what makes a Good Christian as opposed to what makes a Bad Christian. I just want to know... what is the definition (if any) and what is the criteria that creates that definition. For example, if someone hates the poor... and claims to be Christian... is that a criteria or can you still be a Christian and hate (or feel indifferent towards) the poor? If it makes them a good Christian... what is the criteria? If it makes them a bad Christian... why... and according to whom?
I believe the Westboro Baptist Church people display horrible HUMAN traits and a lack of human compassion... nothing to do with their Christian religious belief... it's just a shitty thing as a human being to do to grieving family members. But, I don't get the whole, 'Real/Good Christian' remarks. I presume it is a means for Christians to distance themselves with Rev. Phelps... but, is it their call to make?
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
What I am NOT doing, is trying to define what makes a Good Christian as opposed to what makes a Bad Christian. I just want to know... what is the definition (if any) and what is the criteria that creates that definition. For example, if someone hates the poor... and claims to be Christian... is that a criteria or can you still be a Christian and hate (or feel indifferent towards) the poor? If it makes them a good Christian... what is the criteria? If it makes them a bad Christian... why... and according to whom?
I believe the Westboro Baptist Church people display horrible HUMAN traits and a lack of human compassion... nothing to do with their Christian religious belief... it's just a shitty thing as a human being to do to grieving family members. But, I don't get the whole, 'Real/Good Christian' remarks. I presume it is a means for Christians to distance themselves with Rev. Phelps... but, is it their call to make?
Seems to me you're not really playing fair. Seems to me you're trying to get people to answer a question, the terms of which you haven't fully defined, most notably "good" and "bad". You keep saying you want someone to try and answer what makes a good Christian or bad Christian, with an emphasis on the Christianity. Yet before you can answer that, you (or someone) must define good and bad.
The Artist Formerly Known as Outlaw has tried to define it for you, but you keep dancing around (and moving backward from) the structure he is attempting to provide (e.g., not good vs bad but follows scripture vs. doesn't follow scripture). So if you won't let us define good and bad in a clear manner, how can you expect anyone to answer your question meaningfully?
Perhaps that's not what you want then. Perhaps you aren't really on a quest for knowledge, but are just playing a more sophisticated version of "Can God microwave a burrito until it's too hot for Him to eat?" I suppose only Cosmo knows the truth there. What's in your heart, Cosmo Kramer?
...
Your own words: "...you should not take the words or actions of individuals from the religion as representative and thereafter try to talk about the religion like you're a pro. If you want to discuss the religion, then you are obligated to rationally and genuinely STUDY IT as any other topic. Only then will you be able to see where such fundamentalists fit in the larger concept and history of the entire religion.
... But like I've said before, a learned scholar on the religion does have the ability and knowledge to give his opinion on whether or not they are representative of the religion."
...
So, according to you... the only ones who get to decide who a 'Good Christian/Bad Christian' is... are people who who are learned scholars of Christianity? Who is that... The Pope? Priests? Rev. Pat Robertson? You? Are you a learned scholar of religion? If you are, then what is the definition of a 'Good or Real Christian'? If you are not a learned scholar of religion... how do you know what I am asking is not a valid question? Why is it not a valid question?
The only question I am asking is about Christians and their religion. It has nothing to do with the society or human nature in general. Christians are supposed to know what a 'Good/Real Christian' is, right? Well, the Westboro Baptist Church are Christians... don't they get a say? If not, why not and who gets to make that call? That is why I question the person who claims to be Christian and supports war, hates the poor and is indifferent towards other humans says that the Phelps crew are not 'Real Christians'. Is it their call to make? If so, who gave them that role?
NOTE: I am not saying Westboro Baptist represents all of Christianity. But, they ARE a Christian Church, with their own interpretation... just like all of the other churches of Christianity.
...
On this point: "... to turn a discussion of virtue from humanistic to religious makes it seem as if you are trying to say all humans are inherently good until they turn to religion, then they have to choose between being a good religious person (i.e. taking all words in whatever holy text lightly) or a bad one (taking everything literally). I'm not saying you ARE saying that, but this is just a further example of how such arguments of black and white when it comes to religion are weak and just show poor knowledge of religion in general."
You are correct... I am NOT saying that. I am NOT inferring that religion makes a person good or bad... or that a lack of religion makes them good or bad. I am asking a specific question TO Christians... ABOUT Christians. They are supposed to know about Christianity. By casting judgement upon others (including those within theri own religion), aren't they going against their own tenent of not judging others? What does that make them... Good Christians... by going against their own teachings?
i think the heart of what you're getting at is great, and i completely agree that no one can judge the heart of another. on the other hand, i think we can judge whether or not an action, or teaching, is Christ-like and to that end i think anyone with a elementary knowledge of Jesus can see that Rev Phelps and his congregation's protesting and hate filled placards are NOT Christ-like. you're right, we shouldn't say anyone is a "good" or "bad" christian, that is a heart judgment which no one is qualified to make, but i think we can say that someone's actions are not Christ-like.
one question i have is what do you mean by "question" when you say "That is why I question the person who claims to be Christian and supports war, hates the poor and is indifferent towards other humans says that the Phelps crew are not 'Real Christians'"? i don't think this is your intent but that statement seems like the same judgment that those you are questioning make. if a Christian supports war they are a questionable Christian? i'm not meaning to provoke, i'm just not sure i understand what you're saying here.
...
What I am NOT doing, is trying to define what makes a Good Christian as opposed to what makes a Bad Christian. I just want to know... what is the definition (if any) and what is the criteria that creates that definition. For example, if someone hates the poor... and claims to be Christian... is that a criteria or can you still be a Christian and hate (or feel indifferent towards) the poor? If it makes them a good Christian... what is the criteria? If it makes them a bad Christian... why... and according to whom?
I believe the Westboro Baptist Church people display horrible HUMAN traits and a lack of human compassion... nothing to do with their Christian religious belief... it's just a shitty thing as a human being to do to grieving family members. But, I don't get the whole, 'Real/Good Christian' remarks. I presume it is a means for Christians to distance themselves with Rev. Phelps... but, is it their call to make?
i get the good christian/bad christian thing. we can't judge the heart of another, and i agree. although, we can see that the WBC actions are not Christ-like.
what i'm asking is what you meant when you said "That is why I question the person who claims to be Christian and supports war, hates the poor and is indifferent towards other humans says that the Phelps crew are not 'Real Christians.'" what are you questioning? they way i read it is you question the "Christianity" of a someone who claims to be a Christian but also hates the poor. the two things don't mix. the problem with that is it's the same thing you're saying we can't do; you question a Christian who hates the poor, others question a Christian who protest funerals with hate filled placards. both are heart judgments that you argue we can't make (and i agree with you). now i maybe completely misunderstanding you, but that's why i'm asking.
what are you questioning? they way i read it is you question the "Christianity" of a someone who claims to be a Christian but also hates the poor. the two things don't mix. the problem with that is it's the same thing you're saying we can't do; you question a Christian who hates the poor, others question a Christian who protest funerals with hate filled placards. both are heart judgments that you argue we can't make (and i agree with you). now i maybe completely misunderstanding you, but that's why i'm asking.
Nope, I think you got it. He's using "hating the poor" as an example of de facto "bad" in order to make his point...which is that whether or not good/bad exists, we aren't in a position to judge or determine it.
For me personally, there's a difference between knowing something's wrong and judging a person for doing it. It's a bit gray, I'll admit, but the main thing to remember is that whatever it is that I think that other guy is doing wrong, I've got my own skeletons and sins to deal with. So I can know he's in the wrong but not condemn him for it. Not sure if that makes sense.
what are you questioning? they way i read it is you question the "Christianity" of a someone who claims to be a Christian but also hates the poor. the two things don't mix. the problem with that is it's the same thing you're saying we can't do; you question a Christian who hates the poor, others question a Christian who protest funerals with hate filled placards. both are heart judgments that you argue we can't make (and i agree with you). now i maybe completely misunderstanding you, but that's why i'm asking.
Nope, I think you got it. He's using "hating the poor" as an example of de facto "bad" in order to make his point...which is that whether or not good/bad exists, we aren't in a position to judge or determine it.
For me personally, there's a difference between knowing something's wrong and judging a person for doing it. It's a bit gray, I'll admit, but the main thing to remember is that whatever it is that I think that other guy is doing wrong, I've got my own skeletons and sins to deal with. So I can know he's in the wrong but not condemn him for it. Not sure if that makes sense.
...
Thanx for using your powers of clairvoyance to explain to others what I am trying to get... what am I thinking about your assessment, now?
...
The actual reason why I am asking is because I HEAR people using that phrase, 'Oh... they (Westboro Baptists) aren't Real Christians'. All i'm asking is... what the heck does that mean? Who gets to make that call? Can't the Westboro types call others 'not real Christians' for tolerating homosexuality in America?
What does it take to be a good Christian?
The only reason why I use the poor as an EXAMPLE... is because it is just that... AN EXAMPLE. I mean, I guess I must be wrong in thinking it is part of the Christian faith to tend to the poor... as Jesus did. Perhaps a Christian can tell me what is a good EXAMPLE of what a Good Christian is supposed to be and i can use that and AN EXAMPLE. Because apparently, and previously unbeknownst to me, hating the poor is a trait of a Good Christian.
My bad.
Post edited by Cosmo on
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
What I am NOT doing, is trying to define what makes a Good Christian as opposed to what makes a Bad Christian. I just want to know... what is the definition (if any) and what is the criteria that creates that definition. For example, if someone hates the poor... and claims to be Christian... is that a criteria or can you still be a Christian and hate (or feel indifferent towards) the poor? If it makes them a good Christian... what is the criteria? If it makes them a bad Christian... why... and according to whom?
I believe the Westboro Baptist Church people display horrible HUMAN traits and a lack of human compassion... nothing to do with their Christian religious belief... it's just a shitty thing as a human being to do to grieving family members. But, I don't get the whole, 'Real/Good Christian' remarks. I presume it is a means for Christians to distance themselves with Rev. Phelps... but, is it their call to make?
Seems to me you're not really playing fair. Seems to me you're trying to get people to answer a question, the terms of which you haven't fully defined, most notably "good" and "bad". You keep saying you want someone to try and answer what makes a good Christian or bad Christian, with an emphasis on the Christianity. Yet before you can answer that, you (or someone) must define good and bad.
The Artist Formerly Known as Outlaw has tried to define it for you, but you keep dancing around (and moving backward from) the structure he is attempting to provide (e.g., not good vs bad but follows scripture vs. doesn't follow scripture). So if you won't let us define good and bad in a clear manner, how can you expect anyone to answer your question meaningfully?
Perhaps that's not what you want then. Perhaps you aren't really on a quest for knowledge, but are just playing a more sophisticated version of "Can God microwave a burrito until it's too hot for Him to eat?" I suppose only Cosmo knows the truth there. What's in your heart, Cosmo Kramer?
...
You are reading WAY too deep into this. It is real simple:
What makes a Good(Bad) Christian? Why? According to Whom?
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
...You are reading WAY too deep into this. It is real simple:
What makes a Good(Bad) Christian? Why? According to Whom?
That's very possible.
But in my own reading of this thread, it seems your question has been answered in multiple ways, perhaps not in one cohesive post, but en totale. Outlaw (who isn't even a Christian) answered it -- does the Bible/Qu'ran say to do it? Spamsonite answered it -- would Christ have done it? I attempted to clarify the answers and the context in which they were given. Yet you just keeping asking the same thing over and over.
Taking all that into consideration, it seems to me that there are a couple of implications to consider:
1) You're never going to be satisfied with an answer because you've already decided that there is no answer; or
2) You don't really care to find an answer because you really just want to make your point that you don't think Christianity -- or perhaps any religion -- makes any sense; or
3) You can't read or are incapable of understanding the answers presented to you.
I've read enough of your posts to know that #3 is not the problem, though it is possible for someone of respectable intellect to WILL him or herself not to understand something because they simply don't WANT to understand, but again I don't think that's the case here.
I didn't need "clairvoyance" to determine your intent or at least come up with a hypothesis about it; you've posted enough in this thread and AMT in general that I think people on this board can draw conclusions about you...or at least the "you" that you put forth online. It's nothing to take personally.
Finally, I'm not sure I should even address your reaction to my comments about "hating the poor" b/c it's clear you completely missed my point or I didn't make it clear enough. What I was getting at was that you were implicitly (again, see above explanation for how I drew that conclusion) questioning the ability of Christians to define what is a "real" Christian while setting forth a de facto criteria of that very same thing, namely, that hating the poor was clearly, obviously NOT a trait of a real Christian. Just seemed a bit inconsistent.
Can someone please point me to a Christian group or individual that hates the poor?
sometimes I just don't know about this place...
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
what are you questioning? they way i read it is you question the "Christianity" of a someone who claims to be a Christian but also hates the poor. the two things don't mix. the problem with that is it's the same thing you're saying we can't do; you question a Christian who hates the poor, others question a Christian who protest funerals with hate filled placards. both are heart judgments that you argue we can't make (and i agree with you). now i maybe completely misunderstanding you, but that's why i'm asking.
Nope, I think you got it. He's using "hating the poor" as an example of de facto "bad" in order to make his point...which is that whether or not good/bad exists, we aren't in a position to judge or determine it.
For me personally, there's a difference between knowing something's wrong and judging a person for doing it. It's a bit gray, I'll admit, but the main thing to remember is that whatever it is that I think that other guy is doing wrong, I've got my own skeletons and sins to deal with. So I can know he's in the wrong but not condemn him for it. Not sure if that makes sense.
...
Thanx for using your powers of clairvoyance to explain to others what I am trying to get... what am I thinking about your assessment, now?
...
The actual reason why I am asking is because I HEAR people using that phrase, 'Oh... they (Westboro Baptists) aren't Real Christians'. All i'm asking is... what the heck does that mean? Who gets to make that call? Can't the Westboro types call others 'not real Christians' for tolerating homosexuality in America?
What does it take to be a good Christian?
The only reason why I use the poor as an EXAMPLE... is because it is just that... AN EXAMPLE. I mean, I guess I must be wrong in thinking it is part of the Christian faith to tend to the poor... as Jesus did. Perhaps a Christian can tell me what is a good EXAMPLE of what a Good Christian is supposed to be and i can use that and AN EXAMPLE. Because apparently, and previously unbeknownst to me, hating the poor is a trait of a Good Christian.
My bad.
i think my comments were misunderstood, so to clarify i absolutely agree that taking care of the poor is a great example of Christ-like behavior and the responsibility of any professing Christian. my apologies for any confusion.
i think you're thoughtful and intelligent, (and i'm trying my best ) i just think our wires got crossed!
i think my comments were misunderstood, so to clarify i absolutely agree that taking care of the poor is a great example of Christ-like behavior and the responsibility of any professing Christian. my apologies for any confusion.
i think you're thoughtful and intelligent, (and i'm trying my best ) i just think our wires got crossed!
no hard feelings!
...
No. I got the gist of what you are saying and I agree with you... that at the base level... no one can decide who is a good or 'Real' Christian and who isn't. No one is granted that authority... not learned Biblical scholars, not priests, not the Pope. We decide ourselves... based upon our own honest and truthful self-assessment/self-judgement whether we are good Christians or not. No excuses... no made up justifications.
We can say that the Westboro Baptists people are doing shitty things that are counter to our definition of common decency and compassion for the grieving... but, claiming they are not real Christians is as invalid as their opinions that we are not real Christians because we tolerate homosexuality.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
i think my comments were misunderstood, so to clarify i absolutely agree that taking care of the poor is a great example of Christ-like behavior and the responsibility of any professing Christian. my apologies for any confusion.
i think you're thoughtful and intelligent, (and i'm trying my best ) i just think our wires got crossed!
no hard feelings!
...
No. I got the gist of what you are saying and I agree with you... that at the base level... no one can decide who is a good or 'Real' Christian and who isn't. No one is granted that authority... not learned Biblical scholars, not priests, not the Pope. We decide ourselves... based upon our own honest and truthful self-assessment/self-judgement whether we are good Christians or not. No excuses... no made up justifications.
We can say that the Westboro Baptists people are doing shitty things that are counter to our definition of common decency and compassion for the grieving... but, claiming they are not real Christians is as invalid as their opinions that we are not real Christians because we tolerate homosexuality.
i would say simply that you cannot call yourself Christian if you do not at the very least attempt to follow Christ's teachings. the old testament is not in itself a Christian philosophy, cannot be as Christ was not around yet in the time line of genesis and beyond. That isn't to say you cannot believe in the same God as Christians do, but you cannot call yourself a Christian unless Christ's teachings are what you base your faith on. Might be semantics, but it is just what I believe...I would love for someone from the WBC show me where they are following in the steps of Christ with their behavior, it isn't up to me to judge them, that will come later by whatever supernatural force you believe in, whether it be God or Karma...
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
i would say simply that you cannot call yourself Christian if you do not at the very least attempt to follow Christ's teachings. the old testament is not in itself a Christian philosophy, cannot be as Christ was not around yet in the time line of genesis and beyond. That isn't to say you cannot believe in the same God as Christians do, but you cannot call yourself a Christian unless Christ's teachings are what you base your faith on. Might be semantics, but it is just what I believe...I would love for someone from the WBC show me where they are following in the steps of Christ with their behavior, it isn't up to me to judge them, that will come later by whatever supernatural force you believe in, whether it be God or Karma...
...
Really... can't anyone call themselves Christian? And trying to follow the teaching of Jesus... you either do or you don't. You can try and fail... all it means is you fail.
As for me... I 'try' to follow what Jesus teaches and often fail. not by Satan's doing, but because of my own weaknesses. I accept those failures and don't pilre my mistakes on Jesus' back. I make those mistakes and I own them, therefore, I carry them.
As for the Westboro nuts... just like any other Christian, I'm pretty sure they and pull one Chapter:Verse from the New Testament and tell you what it means... as the Gospel Truth. I can't say whether they are bad Christians... but, I can say they are asshole media whores.
And personally... I don't care what ultimately happens to them. That is between them and their God. My wishing ill will upon them... well, I think it makes me more like them, than different from them. I choose, instead, to view their protest for what they are... pathetically comical rants to whore themselves out for media play... and leave it at that.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
i would say simply that you cannot call yourself Christian if you do not at the very least attempt to follow Christ's teachings. the old testament is not in itself a Christian philosophy, cannot be as Christ was not around yet in the time line of genesis and beyond. That isn't to say you cannot believe in the same God as Christians do, but you cannot call yourself a Christian unless Christ's teachings are what you base your faith on. Might be semantics, but it is just what I believe...I would love for someone from the WBC show me where they are following in the steps of Christ with their behavior, it isn't up to me to judge them, that will come later by whatever supernatural force you believe in, whether it be God or Karma...
...
Really... can't anyone call themselves Christian? And trying to follow the teaching of Jesus... you either do or you don't. You can try and fail... all it means is you fail.
As for me... I 'try' to follow what Jesus teaches and often fail. not by Satan's doing, but because of my own weaknesses. I accept those failures and don't pilre my mistakes on Jesus' back. I make those mistakes and I own them, therefore, I carry them.
As for the Westboro nuts... just like any other Christian, I'm pretty sure they and pull one Chapter:Verse from the New Testament and tell you what it means... as the Gospel Truth. I can't say whether they are bad Christians... but, I can say they are asshole media whores.
And personally... I don't care what ultimately happens to them. That is between them and their God. My wishing ill will upon them... well, I think it makes me more like them, than different from them. I choose, instead, to view their protest for what they are... pathetically comical rants to whore themselves out for media play... and leave it at that.
correct, but they aren't just making mistakes, they are completely ignoring Jesus' teachings. You cannot do that and call yourself christian. you can however make mistakes while trying to follow in the foot steps of Jesus. That doesn't make you a good or bad christian, ignoring jesus altogether makes you a non-christian no matter what you call yourself.
But you are definitely right, it isn't up to me to judge their behavior, that is up to whatever God they will face in the end.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Comments
Thanks. My wife does Jail Ministry every week, and you'd be surprised (or maybe not) at the number of church goers who look down on her for doing this. They ask her why she would do it, and how they are nothing but druggies, thieves and murderers. I guess it never fails to stun her at the arrogance people show. She doesn't do it for pride, but because she feels called to do it. She doesn't go in there preaching hell-fire and brimstone, she becomes an ear for these people. She explains to them that even when the world has cast them out, God is still there wanting a relationship with them....regardless of their crime. She never knows how these people turn out later on, and it started to really get to her. She just wanted to know if some of these people had changed, or did they end up back in jail, or were they even alive. I'll never forget just before Christmas, a young lady called my wife's name, and we turned around. I'd never seen her before, but she ran up to my wife with tears in her eyes, and hugged her. My wife recognized her, and also started crying. It was someone that had turned their life around, not because of my wife, but because my wife took the time to show her that her life could be better than it was. It was an amazing moment, that you simply had to see to truly appreciate. I'm super proud of my wife for doing this work.
But my post wasn't intended to bash Americans. I was thinking of so-called 'Christians' when I posted it, not Americans. The majority of people who call themselves Christians do nothing but sit on their money.
No it wasn't.
How many people - American or otherwise? - who earn a meagre wage head off into the streets at night to feed 75 homeless people out of their own pocket? I bet you won't see any millionaire t.v evangelist or his chest-thumping, S.U.V driving breathren doing as much.
Yeah, that's what I should have said, but I was thiking more of rich, developed countries, and America has more so-called Christians than anywhere else. Also, this thread is about a particular church based in America....so, you see....anyway.
you will only see what you want to, the reason you don't hear about people doing this is because those people don't celebrate it. I see these type of people everyday...if you work with the homeless you will see them...they are everywhere, and yes, people who drive SUV's do good things...I am very saddened by your outlook on wealthy people because of the few jackasses that you have seen or dealt with...prejudice is never a good thing. People who are wealthy do a lot of good things, why do you only focus on the bad?
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Thanks.
OK, fine. LET IT RESUME!
Ah, Utopia.
x
So, the point you are making is that people who will take the words and actions in the name of a religion should not be the overall representative of that religion, right? Does this mean we should stop blaming the entire religion of Islam for the fundamentalists who operate on the militant right wing of that religion?
...
Also... I never made any inferences that Rev. Phelps and his minions speak for all of Christianity. I am just asking the question... who is the one tasked to make the judgement call that he is a 'bad Christian'... or not a 'Real Christian'? Who has that authority and who granted them that privilege? If Rev. Phelps really loves Jesus in his heart... who am I (or anyone else) to judge? That's all I'm asking.
Yes... I thoroughly despise his methods and actions and believe he and his group manipulate the national media to get his point across. I believe the best way to counter his methods are to treat them with the comical clown show that they are... like the way the Comic Con geeks did last year.
...
Also, are Christians who support the Death Penalty good Christians? What about the ones who support war? Are the Christians that harbor so much hatred towards the poor, good Christians? What about the ones who hate the illegal aliens so much? I always thought Jesus' message was about peace and forgiveness... turning the other cheek and all. I thought Jesus cared for the poor and downtrodden... and loves all of Mankind... loving the little children, Red and Yellow, Black and White and all that jazz, not just the one's that are employed and of the same Nationality.
I'm not passing judgement on anyone because I have not been tasked to do so. I believe I need to judge myself and make an honest assessment of myself and how I live the lessons Jesus teaches me. I don't know who is a good Christian and who is a bad one. All I know is who I am and how I operate in this world... amongst humans... regardless of religion, race or nationality. I use the teachings of Jesus as a guidepost... even though I distance myself far away fron the Christian Church and in no way associate myself as a 'Christian'. I feel I do not need the filter of Church doctrine, interpretation
Hail, Hail!!!
Your own words:
"...you should not take the words or actions of individuals from the religion as representative and thereafter try to talk about the religion like you're a pro. If you want to discuss the religion, then you are obligated to rationally and genuinely STUDY IT as any other topic. Only then will you be able to see where such fundamentalists fit in the larger concept and history of the entire religion.
... But like I've said before, a learned scholar on the religion does have the ability and knowledge to give his opinion on whether or not they are representative of the religion."
...
So, according to you... the only ones who get to decide who a 'Good Christian/Bad Christian' is... are people who who are learned scholars of Christianity? Who is that... The Pope? Priests? Rev. Pat Robertson? You? Are you a learned scholar of religion? If you are, then what is the definition of a 'Good or Real Christian'? If you are not a learned scholar of religion... how do you know what I am asking is not a valid question? Why is it not a valid question?
The only question I am asking is about Christians and their religion. It has nothing to do with the society or human nature in general. Christians are supposed to know what a 'Good/Real Christian' is, right? Well, the Westboro Baptist Church are Christians... don't they get a say? If not, why not and who gets to make that call? That is why I question the person who claims to be Christian and supports war, hates the poor and is indifferent towards other humans says that the Phelps crew are not 'Real Christians'. Is it their call to make? If so, who gave them that role?
NOTE: I am not saying Westboro Baptist represents all of Christianity. But, they ARE a Christian Church, with their own interpretation... just like all of the other churches of Christianity.
...
On this point:
"... to turn a discussion of virtue from humanistic to religious makes it seem as if you are trying to say all humans are inherently good until they turn to religion, then they have to choose between being a good religious person (i.e. taking all words in whatever holy text lightly) or a bad one (taking everything literally). I'm not saying you ARE saying that, but this is just a further example of how such arguments of black and white when it comes to religion are weak and just show poor knowledge of religion in general."
You are correct... I am NOT saying that. I am NOT inferring that religion makes a person good or bad... or that a lack of religion makes them good or bad. I am asking a specific question TO Christians... ABOUT Christians. They are supposed to know about Christianity. By casting judgement upon others (including those within theri own religion), aren't they going against their own tenent of not judging others? What does that make them... Good Christians... by going against their own teachings?
Hail, Hail!!!
i think the heart of what you're getting at is great, and i completely agree that no one can judge the heart of another. on the other hand, i think we can judge whether or not an action, or teaching, is Christ-like and to that end i think anyone with a elementary knowledge of Jesus can see that Rev Phelps and his congregation's protesting and hate filled placards are NOT Christ-like. you're right, we shouldn't say anyone is a "good" or "bad" christian, that is a heart judgment which no one is qualified to make, but i think we can say that someone's actions are not Christ-like.
one question i have is what do you mean by "question" when you say "That is why I question the person who claims to be Christian and supports war, hates the poor and is indifferent towards other humans says that the Phelps crew are not 'Real Christians'"? i don't think this is your intent but that statement seems like the same judgment that those you are questioning make. if a Christian supports war they are a questionable Christian? i'm not meaning to provoke, i'm just not sure i understand what you're saying here.
Now, when it comes to what makes someone a learned scholar of religion, it's really just someone, anyone who has studied it long enough - obviously what makes anyone a "scholar" is relative, there's no level to reach. All I am suggesting is that people should study something before talking about it. I don't think that's too much to ask.
As to whether or not you are asking a valid question, yes of course you are, but this is an issue that is discussed all the time. The general consensus is no, no one can judge another on whether or not is a good or bad christian or any other religion for that matter because the idea is that only God can accurately weigh people's intentions with their actions. that being said, I generally believe that intentions are not all that matter. So even if the WBC folks have good intentions in furthering Christ's teaching or whatever, their actions still matter, and their actions, as one would see by just a cursory review of the religion, do not fall in suit with, and in fact contradict, the teachings of the religion. This brings me to my last point. This does have much to do with human virtue (or "nature" as you called it for some odd reason). Perhaps I didn't explain it well enough. I was using the analogy of judging what makes a 'good' human or a 'bad' human with this. At the end of the day, do we have what it takes to call someone a good human or a bad human? It's true that our perceptions of people's actions and assumptions of their intentions are all we have to base it off of, so in essence we can't TRULY judge whether one is a good human or a bad one. Not just that, but do we know what we're basing it off of? Like Christianity or any other religion for that matter, life and its virtues are part of an all-encompassing principle on how to act, perceive, think, etc. It's not just so simple to split into 2 categories of "if you believe in this, you're a good christian, if you believe in that, you're bad." it's much more complicated than that. if a human being supports the death penalty, does that make him bad? Well, for that, I'm sure you'd say it's more complicated. Because human virtue has more complications than a religion's rules, you may argue. So one can be a bad christian but a good human you may say. Well many Christians and religious people in general would disagree with such a contradiction. As in, you keep trying to separate what makes a good religious person from what makes a good human, whereas I am trying to explain that they are mutually inclusive, and just as one is impossible to judge so is the other. it is all just about how we try to bring those on the outside of our beliefs that we judge as wrong, whether they are unreligious pro-war fanatics, or religious death penalty advocates, closer to understand our point of view. some people do it by studying their religion and trying to bring them closer to their religious ideals while others simply advocate humanistic virtues that speak out against such things like war, etc. the reason both ways work is because both are as I've said mutual.
What I am NOT doing, is trying to define what makes a Good Christian as opposed to what makes a Bad Christian. I just want to know... what is the definition (if any) and what is the criteria that creates that definition. For example, if someone hates the poor... and claims to be Christian... is that a criteria or can you still be a Christian and hate (or feel indifferent towards) the poor? If it makes them a good Christian... what is the criteria? If it makes them a bad Christian... why... and according to whom?
I believe the Westboro Baptist Church people display horrible HUMAN traits and a lack of human compassion... nothing to do with their Christian religious belief... it's just a shitty thing as a human being to do to grieving family members. But, I don't get the whole, 'Real/Good Christian' remarks. I presume it is a means for Christians to distance themselves with Rev. Phelps... but, is it their call to make?
Hail, Hail!!!
The Artist Formerly Known as Outlaw has tried to define it for you, but you keep dancing around (and moving backward from) the structure he is attempting to provide (e.g., not good vs bad but follows scripture vs. doesn't follow scripture). So if you won't let us define good and bad in a clear manner, how can you expect anyone to answer your question meaningfully?
Perhaps that's not what you want then. Perhaps you aren't really on a quest for knowledge, but are just playing a more sophisticated version of "Can God microwave a burrito until it's too hot for Him to eat?" I suppose only Cosmo knows the truth there. What's in your heart, Cosmo Kramer?
i get the good christian/bad christian thing. we can't judge the heart of another, and i agree. although, we can see that the WBC actions are not Christ-like.
what i'm asking is what you meant when you said "That is why I question the person who claims to be Christian and supports war, hates the poor and is indifferent towards other humans says that the Phelps crew are not 'Real Christians.'" what are you questioning? they way i read it is you question the "Christianity" of a someone who claims to be a Christian but also hates the poor. the two things don't mix. the problem with that is it's the same thing you're saying we can't do; you question a Christian who hates the poor, others question a Christian who protest funerals with hate filled placards. both are heart judgments that you argue we can't make (and i agree with you). now i maybe completely misunderstanding you, but that's why i'm asking.
For me personally, there's a difference between knowing something's wrong and judging a person for doing it. It's a bit gray, I'll admit, but the main thing to remember is that whatever it is that I think that other guy is doing wrong, I've got my own skeletons and sins to deal with. So I can know he's in the wrong but not condemn him for it. Not sure if that makes sense.
Thanx for using your powers of clairvoyance to explain to others what I am trying to get... what am I thinking about your assessment, now?
...
The actual reason why I am asking is because I HEAR people using that phrase, 'Oh... they (Westboro Baptists) aren't Real Christians'. All i'm asking is... what the heck does that mean? Who gets to make that call? Can't the Westboro types call others 'not real Christians' for tolerating homosexuality in America?
What does it take to be a good Christian?
The only reason why I use the poor as an EXAMPLE... is because it is just that... AN EXAMPLE. I mean, I guess I must be wrong in thinking it is part of the Christian faith to tend to the poor... as Jesus did. Perhaps a Christian can tell me what is a good EXAMPLE of what a Good Christian is supposed to be and i can use that and AN EXAMPLE. Because apparently, and previously unbeknownst to me, hating the poor is a trait of a Good Christian.
My bad.
Hail, Hail!!!
You are reading WAY too deep into this. It is real simple:
What makes a Good(Bad) Christian? Why? According to Whom?
Hail, Hail!!!
But in my own reading of this thread, it seems your question has been answered in multiple ways, perhaps not in one cohesive post, but en totale. Outlaw (who isn't even a Christian) answered it -- does the Bible/Qu'ran say to do it? Spamsonite answered it -- would Christ have done it? I attempted to clarify the answers and the context in which they were given. Yet you just keeping asking the same thing over and over.
Taking all that into consideration, it seems to me that there are a couple of implications to consider:
1) You're never going to be satisfied with an answer because you've already decided that there is no answer; or
2) You don't really care to find an answer because you really just want to make your point that you don't think Christianity -- or perhaps any religion -- makes any sense; or
3) You can't read or are incapable of understanding the answers presented to you.
I've read enough of your posts to know that #3 is not the problem, though it is possible for someone of respectable intellect to WILL him or herself not to understand something because they simply don't WANT to understand, but again I don't think that's the case here.
I didn't need "clairvoyance" to determine your intent or at least come up with a hypothesis about it; you've posted enough in this thread and AMT in general that I think people on this board can draw conclusions about you...or at least the "you" that you put forth online. It's nothing to take personally.
Finally, I'm not sure I should even address your reaction to my comments about "hating the poor" b/c it's clear you completely missed my point or I didn't make it clear enough. What I was getting at was that you were implicitly (again, see above explanation for how I drew that conclusion) questioning the ability of Christians to define what is a "real" Christian while setting forth a de facto criteria of that very same thing, namely, that hating the poor was clearly, obviously NOT a trait of a real Christian. Just seemed a bit inconsistent.
sometimes I just don't know about this place...
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
i think my comments were misunderstood, so to clarify i absolutely agree that taking care of the poor is a great example of Christ-like behavior and the responsibility of any professing Christian. my apologies for any confusion.
i think you're thoughtful and intelligent, (and i'm trying my best
no hard feelings!
No. I got the gist of what you are saying and I agree with you... that at the base level... no one can decide who is a good or 'Real' Christian and who isn't. No one is granted that authority... not learned Biblical scholars, not priests, not the Pope. We decide ourselves... based upon our own honest and truthful self-assessment/self-judgement whether we are good Christians or not. No excuses... no made up justifications.
We can say that the Westboro Baptists people are doing shitty things that are counter to our definition of common decency and compassion for the grieving... but, claiming they are not real Christians is as invalid as their opinions that we are not real Christians because we tolerate homosexuality.
Hail, Hail!!!
i would say simply that you cannot call yourself Christian if you do not at the very least attempt to follow Christ's teachings. the old testament is not in itself a Christian philosophy, cannot be as Christ was not around yet in the time line of genesis and beyond. That isn't to say you cannot believe in the same God as Christians do, but you cannot call yourself a Christian unless Christ's teachings are what you base your faith on. Might be semantics, but it is just what I believe...I would love for someone from the WBC show me where they are following in the steps of Christ with their behavior, it isn't up to me to judge them, that will come later by whatever supernatural force you believe in, whether it be God or Karma...
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Really... can't anyone call themselves Christian? And trying to follow the teaching of Jesus... you either do or you don't. You can try and fail... all it means is you fail.
As for me... I 'try' to follow what Jesus teaches and often fail. not by Satan's doing, but because of my own weaknesses. I accept those failures and don't pilre my mistakes on Jesus' back. I make those mistakes and I own them, therefore, I carry them.
As for the Westboro nuts... just like any other Christian, I'm pretty sure they and pull one Chapter:Verse from the New Testament and tell you what it means... as the Gospel Truth. I can't say whether they are bad Christians... but, I can say they are asshole media whores.
And personally... I don't care what ultimately happens to them. That is between them and their God. My wishing ill will upon them... well, I think it makes me more like them, than different from them. I choose, instead, to view their protest for what they are... pathetically comical rants to whore themselves out for media play... and leave it at that.
Hail, Hail!!!
But you are definitely right, it isn't up to me to judge their behavior, that is up to whatever God they will face in the end.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan