Discussion Is Christianity the solution to our problems?

[JinZhin]

nah...
Religions are mostly outdated sets of beliefs that served as explanations to any questions someone might have about the world, life itself, a human condition and a way to control masses in some cases. Christianity is just one of them, and personally, I think it already had enough problems with it.
You talk about ''removing the rules than incentivize people to be god to one another'', but that is backwards. People have innate ability to do terrible things to each other, but also to do good things and help each other, if it weren't for that fact alone, people would never form tribes and survive as a species.

 

[Anxieyote]

ReLIEgion is poison.

I do think that a lot of lies are present in the Christian doctrine, but I think the core principles and takeaways that a sane Christian has may be beneficial. For instance, if I were to reject the outlandish supernatural stories, and focus on concepts like having mercy, having forgiveness, loving my neighbor as I love myself, etc., I think that the outcome of following those principles could be good.

And when you say it is poisonous, I would argue that our mindset and mentality is far more poisonous and toxic than someone who uses Christianity as their life guide.

When I am faced with a difficult task, I stare at my container of SN and think to myself, "I cant handle this. I would be better off dead." Whereas a devout Christian's response would be, "I know God is challenging me, and I have faith that I am being put in this difficult situation for a reason. I can overcome this, just as I have overcome the other obstacles God has used to test me."

The difference is night and day. The Christian believes that their suffering has purpose; it is a "challenge" to overcome. But based on our nihilistic personal beliefs—our life (and subsequent death) doesn't matter, so why not just end it when the suffering gets to be overwhelming? Even if a Christian's life doesn't have meaning, they're going to be much more resilient in the face of life's obstacles because they believe their life is significant.

I cant speak for anyone else here, but I know that my disregard for my life makes me value the lives of others a lot less too. I use phrases like "NPC's" to describe other people, which is an outright dismissal of large swaths of people. I also wouldn't have any qualms with a meteorite striking the planet and killing all of humanity; a price I'd be willing to pay for a quick and easy death. That, to me—is moral bankruptcy. If I had actual principles, the thought of something like that happening would horrify me.

 

[NSA]

I do think that a lot of lies are present in the Christian doctrine, but I think the core principles and takeaways that a sane Christian has may be beneficial. For instance, if I were to reject the outlandish supernatural stories, and focus on concepts like having mercy, having forgiveness, loving my neighbor as I love myself, etc., I think that the outcome of following those principles could be good.

You don't need Christianity for that. You clearly already believe those things.

Religion does seem to give normals an excuse for having a shared purpose and sense of community though, so it is kind of a hard problem to answer, I admit. There are secular/atheistic groups out there trying to preserve the wholesome aspects of that shared purpose without all the bs, but it does require some looking to find them. I do hope they become more common.

a devout Christian's response would be, "I know God is challenging me, and I have faith that I am being put in this difficult situation for a reason. I can overcome this, just as I have overcome the other obstacles God has used to test me."

Don't know about you or others, but being raised Christian, with this exact mindset, only made me hate God and myself, for his constantly feeling the need to shove me through the meat grinder for no discernable reason other than "His Own Glorious Purpose". I never could understand why the story of Job was supposed to be inspitational. Like, God literally made a bet with the devil to see just how much suffering his pet human could take before he cracked. Like, who the fuck does that? The way I see it, if I have to suffer life for a "Glorious Purpose", it may as well be my own and not some invisible asshole's who (through the doctrine I was taught) wants to send me to hell for being exactly the way he made me.


If your hell bent (heh) on Christianity or any other traditional-type religion as a surrogate life purpose, then please be careful to pick a flavor/community that isn't toxic garbage, because way too many of them are.

 

[Slaanesh]

I got really into reading Christian philosophy and theology Kierkegaard, John Calvin, Thomas Aquinas all that jazz.

Fascinating stuff, still can't believe in a talking donkey though......

 

[NSA]

I cant speak for anyone else here, but I know that my disregard for my life makes me value the lives of others a lot less too. I use phrases like "NPC's" to describe other people, which is an outright dismissal of large swaths of people. I also wouldn't have any qualms with a meteorite striking the planet and killing all of humanity; a price I'd be willing to pay for a quick and easy death. That, to me—is moral bankruptcy. If I had actual principles, the thought of something like that happening would horrify me.

I am guilty of that too. It's an easy trap to fall into. Normals are well, not like us. "Us" being anyone who knows what it's like to be not-normal.

Another bit of bs my Christian upbringing left on me, is the idea of thoughts being inherently sinful. Sorry Jesus, but that's wrong. You can think anything you want. it's what you do (or don't do) that matters.

So sayeth I.

 

[The Disinherited]

I got really into reading Christian philosophy and theology Kierkegaard, John Calvin, Thomas Aquinas all that jazz.

Fascinating stuff, still can't believe in a talking donkey though......

How did you go about reading and understanding Aquinas? His Summa is enormous in length and I would imagine his language is hard enough to read unless you've (not that I have) read Aristotle (and maybe Plato)? I also find OP's question too broad, look at the vast cultural difference between Catholics and Protestants, look at the lax morals of Southern (American southern) evangelicals Vs the Rigidly ordered society of Old Catholic Austria, what about the Eastern Church which has all the reason in the world to believe in itself and it's unique destiny that the Slavs shall one day have their Day. Christianity boggles my mind and I would love to Truely understand it, it's at odds with it's self on everything, take slavery for example, Wilberforce and Lincoln were protestants and are largely credited with abolishing slavery in the west yet Catholicism and the Eastern Church don't share that same disgust with slavery....

I am more interested in Buddism, it doesnt strictly condemn ctb.

If you're suicidal and presumably live a low quality life, why would you put your faith in Buddhism? All it promises is nothingness, The Holy Bible is literally aimed at people like us with it's promise that (if true) transcends our every failure, humiliation and moment(s) of suffering into something Good. Buddhism is for eastern elites just as much as western elites all believe in nothing. The Buddha Gautama was a wealthy prince with a beautiful wife and was surrounded by people that listened to him, Christ and plenty of OT prophets were despised throughout their lives and are much more like us than any Buddha.

 

[Suicidebydeath]

Two Christians agree with each other that Christianity is best.
*surprised Pikachu shock face*

Ehh Devil's Advocate:

"Countries where Islam has made the whole country, or large groups violent in modern times: dozens."
Entire countries is hyperbole at best, honestly. Poverty, governments and civil wars are responsible for a lot of the violence, along with racial tensions. Not the general populace.

"Countries where Christianity has made the whole country, or large groups violent in modern times: none."
South Sudan would like a word. I'm not a big fan of the KKK either. They practised religious persecution along with the other murdery brutality they're better known for.

 

[The Disinherited]

The glaringly obvious mistake when resorting to equating Islam with Christianity is in not judging Christ alongside Muhammad. Islam is popular because of its self affirmation (the uniting of the Arab, Iranians and other races with the monotheistic God of the Bible) in the face of an increasingly aggressive state of Israel. If the muslims in Iran or Palestine were to renounce Islam they'd be committing mass suicide, the narrative they hold to that the God of Abraham is what had always guided Muhammad on his journey is essential to the Muslims...I have spoken enviously of this progenerative, self affirming and masculine set of beliefs (The Muslim worldview) in the thread about honor societies and suicide, and I'll add here that Christ truly has pacified us but only partially, this is our great conflict...we don't self immolate or commit seppuku because we're horrified by the barbarity of it whilst at the same time we can't bring ourselves to ruthlessly strive and self affirm and resort to necessary evils as a way to found a place in this world (which is what the masculine christ-free Muslims have no problem with), the world for us is Scylla and Charybdis with the evil of suicide on one side and the piecemeal sale of our souls for worldly profit on the other, and the further we go from one the closer we go to another.

 

[vinterland8]

No, it's not. Seek strength, not peace and weakness.

"Countries where Christianity has made the whole country, or large groups violent in modern times: none."
South Sudan would like a word. I'm not a big fan of the KKK either. They practised religious persecution along with the other murdery brutality they're better known for.

The KKK are clearly not your average American Christians, give me a break. The overwhelming majority of Christians despise the KKK.

The difference is night and day. The Christian believes that their suffering has purpose; it is a "challenge" to overcome. But based on our nihilistic personal beliefs—our life (and subsequent death) doesn't matter, so why not just end it when the suffering gets to be overwhelming? Even if a Christian's life doesn't have meaning, they're going to be much more resilient in the face of life's obstacles because they believe their life is significant.

Yes, this is precisely why atheism is maladaptive. There are, however, better forms of religiousness than Christianity.

 

[6ftunder]

There is nothing wrong with being religious.
Individual freedoms, and all that (isn't that what this forum is about?).

The issue for me is that christians as a whole are likely the most hypocritical group there is. So much so that it's literally woven into their belief system:
1. The Bible tells them that they're sinners like the rest of us, and yet they have a high opinion of themselves as "God's chosen people".
2. In the Bible, Jesus reached out to the marginalised. Despite this, Christians by and large pour scorn on those they dislike, notably the LGBT community. They should instead reach out to the marginalised...you know...as Jesus did!
3. Jesus overturned tables when traders turned a place of worship into a market. But you have churches like Hillsong and C3 who are obsessed with money, influence, and power.

I could go on.

 

[PreussenBlueJay]

We need to discover a drug that makes everyone love everyone else. The problem with Christianity now is that people can take advantage of true "communists" who are devoted to everyone else first.

 

[The Disinherited]

No, it's not. Seek strength, not peace and weakness.

The KKK are clearly not your average American Christians, give me a break. The overwhelming majority of Christians despise the KKK.

Yes, this is precisely why atheism is maladaptive. There are, however, better forms of religiousness than Christianity.

And what are these better forms?

 

[vinterland8]

And what are these better forms?

Anything that spares "liberal" moralization, produces strength, and gives natural purpose. Various forms of paganism which evoke a certain Wotanic archetype. Collectivism, to an extent, can fill this gap, but I haven't decided on an ideal religion. It's worth mentioning though, that I don't care about the verity of said religion, the aesthetics alone are important. By and large, Christianity as a religion only appeals to those who are fed up with life, who view the world as evil. Consequently, piousness within the Church has manifested as the Gnostics, the Stylites (early monastics), post-von-Bingen Catholicism, and so on. Buddhism leads to a similar, though much more intense, hatred of the world. An ideal god idealizes the powerful (which entails indiviudal and collective strength, reproduction, etc.), and the importance of the material world, whereas Jesus idealizes the lowly, and the work done for his Heavenly Kingdom.

The problem with Christianity now is that people can take advantage of true "communists" who are devoted to everyone else first.

Provided I'm interpreting this correctly: yes, the early Christians were radically left-wing for their time, almost Marxian. To the credit of the Pharisees, Jesus represented not only a threat to hierarchy, but also to their Jewish tradition. It's no surprise that the Jews of antiquity (who at the time were more radically group-oriented and Darwinian) ordered Pontius Pilate to free (pro-Jewish) Barabbas rather than Jesus. If culture played a predominant role, Christians in the renaissance and colonial era were dominant specifically due to non-Christian ideas.

 

[The Disinherited]

Anything that spares "liberal" moralization, produces strength, and gives natural purpose. Various forms of paganism which evoke a certain Wotanic archetype. Collectivism, to an extent, can fill this gap, but I haven't decided on an ideal religion. It's worth mentioning though, that I don't care about the verity of said religion, the aesthetics alone are important. By and large, Christianity as a religion only appeals to those who are fed up with life, who view the world as evil. Consequently, piousness within the Church has manifested as the Gnostics, the Stylites (early monastics), post-von-Bingen Catholicism, and so on. Buddhism leads to a similar, though much more intense, hatred of the world. An ideal god idealizes the powerful (which entails indiviudal and collective strength, reproduction, etc.), and the importance of the material world, whereas Jesus idealizes the lowly, and the work done for his Heavenly Kingdom.

Provided I'm interpreting this correctly: yes, the early Christians were radically left-wing for their time, almost Marxian. To the credit of the Pharisees, Jesus represented not only a threat to hierarchy, but also to their Jewish tradition. It's no surprise that the Jews of antiquity (who at the time were more radically group-oriented and Darwinian) ordered Pontius Pilate to free (pro-Jewish) Barabbas rather than Jesus. If culture played a predominant role, Christians in the renaissance and colonial era were dominant specifically due to non-Christian ideas.

I'm sorry vinterland but this post reeks of some dangerous beliefs. A Wotanic pagan collectivist God that idealises the powerful and the material world sounds like something very close to the God of the Nazis. Also what you said about piousness goes over my head so you'll have to explain.

 

[needforvoid_]

We have laws, there's no dogma behind those, just set of rules to try curb the chaos, exchange of some freedom for safety, conditions to live in a given society. And we break them. I still think that's the best we can do. You can obey, get punished or leave. I don't care what someone believes in.

 

[mandyjohnuk]

Religion is an invention to control many which results in mass hysteria. It's failed since it's creation. Look how many wars have started and still rage today all in the name of religion.

 

[Pluto]

Religion is an invention to control many which results in mass hysteria. It's failed since it's creation. Look how many wars have started and still rage today all in the name of religion.

Religion exists as a thought in people's minds and disappears upon investigation. Likewise nationalism, which boils down to imaginary lines drawn on the planet to distinguish 'us' versus 'them'. The problem is that humanity is a frightfully primitive species that somehow cannot smell its own sh--.

 

[whatevs]

Religion exists as a thought in people's minds and disappears upon investigation. Likewise nationalism, which boils down to imaginary lines drawn on the planet to distinguish 'us' versus 'them'. The problem is that humanity is a frightfully primitive species that somehow cannot smell its own sh--.

Nationalism is not completely illusory, it has a genetic origin which makes it very real. It has more to do with lineage and relativeness than with lines on the map. I'm just correcting you as someone that wonders in the outskirts of the far-right, modern nationalists in the 1st world are "racists" not "map-line respecters". They uphold the race and culture of a nation.

Also religion has a kernel of truth in it.

 

[Pluto]

Nationalism is not completely illusory, it has a genetic origin which makes it very real. It has more to do with lineage and relativeness than with lines on the map. I'm just correcting you as someone that wonders in the outskirts of the far-right, modern nationalists in the 1st world are "racists" not "map-line respecters". They uphold the race and culture of a nation.

Also religion has a kernel of truth in it.

Religion does have a kernel of truth, but the problem is that 'the Tao that can be spoken of is not the true Tao'. Ironically, this makes true religion a field that points to something beyond itself. It is a stepping stone rather than a final destination.

The scientific consensus regarding 'most recent common ancestor' type studies points to race being illusory also. You and I are probably 15th cousins, sharing 99.9% of DNA. We are probably 10^9th cousins with a random fish in the middle of the ocean. All definitions of us versus them are arbitrary and only created to give the primitive human spirit some outlet for its tribalism.

 

[whatevs]

Religion does have a kernel of truth, but the problem is that 'the Tao that can be spoken of is not the true Tao'. Ironically, this makes true religion a field that points to something beyond itself. It is a stepping stone rather than a final destination.

The scientific consensus regarding 'most recent common ancestor' type studies points to race being illusory also. You and I are probably 15th cousins, sharing 99.9% of DNA. We are probably 10^9th cousins with a random fish in the middle of the ocean. All definitions of us versus them are arbitrary and only created to give the primitive human spirit some outlet for its tribalism.

That scientific consensus is actually not scientific at all but a conclusion resulting from the hegemonic cultural mileau. Basically they want that to be true and they have all the funding and smarts to make it seem real. There's an obvious difference between the people of the nations, especially when comparing continental masses of people. Asian, European, Arabic, Sub-saharan African...

Any alien species watching from the outside would recognize that these are significant and heritable differences. Speaking of genetic similarity in that way is tricky since we share 98,6% of genes with chimpanzees and so on. The thing is that race is something of genetic origin as it is observable, heritable and impactful. We are probably speaking of a relatively small number of genes or they way they relate to each other being different, but they come from thousands of years of evolution in different environments, so it's quite delusional to pretend that doesn't create sub-species or the beginning of sub-species.

Anyway, even if you think race isn't real I'm just saying nationalism is more based on race (even if it's an illusion), language and culture than a piece of land or the shifting delimitation of countries.

 

[mandyjohnuk]

We are all part of the same race. The human race. A small minority of people spoil it for the many in this world resulting in hatred.

 

[ayb]

Christianity is a vile religion because it fetishizes suffering. That such suffering brings you closer to Jesus and God. It glorifies the suffering that Jesus experienced on the cross.

This was the same exact logic that people like Mother Theresa used when she denied painkillers and other treatments to patients in her """""""""hospital"""""""" because she saw suffering as bringing patients closer to Jesus. Merely look at how Christians treat the topic of abortion when it comes to severe fetal deformaties and disorders and where the baby will experience nothing but abject suffering until it dies. They won't even allow abortion in such cases. I've seen Christians state a life of suffering is still preferable to no life and death. I could not disagree more because death is not the worst of fates. Even the Dalai Lama says abortion should be permitted in such cases:

Dalai Lama Backs Some Abortions

The Dalai Lama, the 1989 Nobel Peace Prize winner and the self-exiled leader of Tibetan Buddhism, says that abortion and euthanasia are permissible under certain circumstances but that neither should be widely performed.

www.latimes.com

You will never see a Catholic priest say the same. All Abrahamic religions are utter fucking garbage but Christianity is a special kind of awful.

 

[Luchs]

I definetly agree that some sort of spiritual guiding dogma is needed for a population to be as productive and happy as it can be, and that those dogmas need to be reinforced by actual believe, but I highly doubt that there ever will be a one world religion. It is in human nature to rebell, if one believe system gets too overbearing, just by the nature of it being too large, contrarians will spring up and try to break it apart. Just look at Christianity or Islam, both are fractured along so many lines.

If I am allowed to be a bit more controversial I'd say that a religion of blood, tied to ancestry is the strongest form and probably most optimal kind of religion. You know, blood is thicker than water and yada, yada. Look at Judaism, it is a religion tied to the people that descended from the tribes of Israel, it has endured two thousand years of diaspora and oppression. No other way can a religion be that resilient, than when it is bound to ancestry. So I would argue for an entirely new religion based on the old and tied to blood.

 

[The Disinherited]

I definetly agree that some sort of spiritual guiding dogma is needed for a population to be as productive and happy as it can be, and that those dogmas need to be reinforced by actual believe, but I highly doubt that there ever will be a one world religion. It is in human nature to rebell, if one believe system gets too overbearing, just by the nature of it being too large, contrarians will spring up and try to break it apart. Just look at Christianity or Islam, both are fractured along so many lines.

If I am allowed to be a bit more controversial I'd say that a religion of blood, tied to ancestry is the strongest form and probably most optimal kind of religion. You know, blood is thicker than water and yada, yada. Look at Judaism, it is a religion tied to the people that descended from the tribes of Israel, it has endured two thousand years of diaspora and oppression. No other way can a religion be that resilient, than when it is bound to ancestry. So I would argue for an entirely new religion based on the old and tied to blood.

5000+ years

 

[Eily]

What you're saying is that if every single person felt the same way and believed in the same thing, we can be uniformed in politics, behavior, values, etc.

So then it's not really believing in Christianity is it? It can apply to any religion or belief system.. if everyone was on the same page then ofc there would be less problems but in the real world, it cannot happen.

Whenever the world started having humans, they were all on the same page and we evolved because people started thinking differently. Even if you have thousands of people agreeing on the same thing, there will always be one person that will wake up and challenge it (as they should)

I was raised Catholic and it is one of the reasons why I have an irrational fear (that I do not wish to discuss) so I decided to stop believing for my own sanity. So for me, Christianity did not help me.

I don't think existing really has a purpose, I think we just exist because we do. It just happened. Whether you die or not makes no actual difference for Earth or the universe. There is no logical reason to exist for 'tests' and 'loyalty' to God or whatever. We did not ask to be here, we just happened to be born. That is why I feel we do not owe anyone anything.

 

[Weebster]

Jesus is NOT the messiah.

Do Jews Believe In Jesus? | Aish

Do Jews believe in Jesus? Read on to learn more about why for 2,000 years Jews have rejected the Christian idea of Jesus as messiah.

aish.com

 

[Arrow]

Unironically religion would probably help a lot of people here despite how silly it seems. I don't think it is that crazy to think that if you're at the point where you are ready to kill yourself that you might as well start believing in Gods or magic if it helps you stay alive. There's probably a good reason humans evolved to create religions in the first place, seems like they're useful in giving people a purpose and can give people purpose better than most other things can. Why else would more secular societies be so much more miserable than less advanced more religious ones?

Lots of people SAY they can get everything from religions without believing in the gods and stuff, but those same people are usually still miserable or feel very lost in life.

growing up a bit has made me realize that the truth isn't actually all that valuable. i've noticed there's so many obviously true things in this world that, if more people knew them, would just lead to things being worse overall. there are lots of true things people don't seem to be able to handle. the more you know the arbitrary/pointless everything seems. so if believing in something that obviously isn't true (like god or heaven etc) makes you feel better about your life, then you might as well go for it. it's all rather arbitrary and subjective anyways.

 

[Leonfreak17]

No.

 

[newave3]

Yes

 

[Pluto]

Jesus is NOT the messiah.

Do Jews Believe In Jesus? | Aish

Do Jews believe in Jesus? Read on to learn more about why for 2,000 years Jews have rejected the Christian idea of Jesus as messiah.

aish.com

Home - Jews for Jesus

You can be Jewish and be a follower of Jesus. Experience the spiritual richness we’ve discovered as followers of the Jewish Messiah.

jewsforjesus.org