Morality of Christianity?

[PsiUmbreon]

Yeah, the addition of a debate forum made me run back here lol.

Anyways, yeah, I have a great question to bring into discussion. Now many of you may instantly be offended that I have even brought this up, but here it is:

Is Christianity a moral religion? Now, many of you may say yes instantly, giving this one no thought. But, I am here to show that it's not so easy to say that...

First up is their concept of Hell (which by the way was actually stolen from the Nordic Hel, or underworld.) Now, who goes to hell? According to the Bible, any "immoral" person, which would include homosexuals and nonbelievers. Now, are these people really immoral? If someone likes another person who happens to be the same gender, is that really a crime? How does it hurt anyone? Does it hurt the people involved, who are actually in love, just as much as straight people? No. I would argue that forcing a gay man to marry a woman, when he is not attracted to them, is hurtful for the gay man. So people are condemned to burn in fire for all eternity because they were born gay? Not very moral.

And how about the nonbelievers? People who were born into a different faith, or people who decided to be atheist? Their "crime" is not worshipping God. How is that immoral? Why should people be forced to worship something they don't even know exists?

What gets me on this one is that a Christian that commited 30 murders can go to heaven, while an atheist that has done many charitable deeds throughtout his or her life goes straight to hell when they die. Can anyone not see the inequality in this? How is that moral? How is that fair?

Secondly, I would like to expose the immorality involved in the story of Adam and Eve. Now, according to the Bible, Adam and Eve were banished from the garden for disobeying God. Now, there is supposedly no sin in the Garden of Eden, right? Then how could they have sinned? Did they even know what sin was? How could someone commit a sin without it even existing? And they were banished for sinning, without even knowing about sin.

Now, any female should instantly be outraged by this one. After Adam and Eve "sinned", God punished them by banishing them, and making them experience pain. Furthermore, God proclaimed that from then on, all women were to be subject to their husbands, and that they would be subject to the pain of childbirth, because Eve "sinned" first. This is sexist. According to the scripture, it is a woman's fault we're all banished from the garden, and women now have to listen to men forever, and endure the pain of childbirth. Ladies, do you think you should be forced to unconditionally listen to your husbands/future husbands(if you get one) ?

Finally, I would like to point out that throughout the Bible, God kills many people, including innocent ones. The biggest example of this is the great flood story in Genesis. God got mad at the world, because people were sinning. So he decided to kill everyone except Noah and his family by drowning them. Everyone. Oh, and every animal except for two. Do you think it's right to kill people for doing wrong? KILL them? And what about the babies and animals that didn't supposedly make it out onto the ark? Do you think it's right that God killed everyone? EVERYONE?

But wait a minute. I thought God was perfect?! Well, apparently not.

OK this should open up the flood gates a bit. I am really waiting to hear some good responses from Christians.

 

[bell02+]

Well this is going to be a fun topic (not being sarcastic, I actually wanted to discust this earilier on another forum, but didn't because I didn't want to offend atheist accedentally). A lot of things that you meantioned were the basic excuses of atheist. Not that it is a negitive view, but more of a closeminded one.
I can't say much right now (because there is something else I need to do and I'm a little tired, but I'll be back for more), but it's a bad idea to go word for word from the bible. Why? Pick your favorite japanese site and translate it with bablefish into english. Now translate that into french; then into spanish. That's basically the Bible in a nutshell (though a tad bit of an exaggeration, it's still true). The bible has a lot of good messages in it, that's what is good to keep and what is meant to be learned from chruch, however word for word it starts to loose relivence when you take it literal. I'm sure any non-wavering christian can tell you this. (-edit-, well there are some exceptions to this comment... maybe I should say any open christian.)

(ok more later )

Also on a side note what really is moral? It's a question more difficult to ask because it depends on the individual's opinions.

 

[PsiUmbreon]

We'd all agree on whether killing someone is immoral. Yet God did it tons of times in the Bible.

And aah,the old "literal argument" translation. I use the King James version, which is the best translation into English. Other versions like to whitewash the atrocities God committed in stories.

And do you know what was actually said in the Bible in Hebrew? If you don't (which I doubt you do) then how can you say it was any better? If anything, it was actually worse.

And it's not an "excuse" for being atheist, it's a valid reason. I could ask you the same thing about your "excuse" for being Christian.

 

[S_M]

Then couldn't you argue that most of the world is immoral, due to using the death penalty?

 

[The Big Al]

Accordian to the Lutheran Doctrine, faith in Jesus as your savior is the key to heaven. As for the 30 murders thing, I believe said "God's powers should not be tested" or something to that affect. He also said it is not an excuse to sin. I doubt the "your gay, so you're going to Hell" bit. Homosexuality is no greater sin than stealing from the corner store.

In the garden of Eden, Lucifer assumed the form of the serpant. He had already disobeyed God and therefore brought corruption upon his creation. The Jews and Muslims believe this to also be true. Similar stories are told in various relgions and mythologies of how perfect was corrupted.

For the woman are subjects thing, I'm wonder what version you read. The bible was filled with women who were anything but subjects. Some were even God's profits.

As for God killing people. God said he'd spare a town if it had one clean person. During the flood, men had been corrupted by sin. It was the closest he came to wiping the slate clean. However, he did promise to never again summon such an event. And in Exodus, Moses gave Pharoh several cahnces to release God's people from bondage. His plague were only annoyances, not meant to kill. The angel of death was the last resort (the weapon of mass destruction if you will). God didn't want to kill his creations. However, it was sometimes unavoidable. However, that's old testiment. That's the law which is punishment. The New Testiment is the gospel which is the love and hope.


EDIT: As for the status of today. I believe Christianity is a moral religion, however Christians are another story. The image of the peace-loving Jesus who sat with sinners and preaching the glory of mercy and the meak has been replacwed my the extremist Evangelicals with a militant bigot who is only here to save them and the rest of us can burn in Hell. I believe that my relgion is being corrupted like isalm is by Al-Qaeda to serve a fundamentalist agenda.

 

[GrnMarvl14]

I thought the Christian concept of Hell existed before they made contact with the Nordic peoples. Although I could see it being stolen from the Greek underworld and modified to only be a bad thing instead of the general area that the Greeks had it being.

But before I really comment on some of the things already said, I just want to say what I think:

I think Christianity in its infancy was a moraery little bad. But I think the people who took up the religion molded it and shaped it to suit their own whims (as is often the case with ANY large group's teachings). I think a good thing was taken and corrupted in such a way that to argue about any specific thing was seen as going against the entire religion. I think the movie Dogma spoke volumes about this. Yeah, it was a comedy...but comedies have the habit of being the most truthful.

According to the Bible, any "immoral" person, which would include homosexuals and nonbelievers.

This was one of the first things that pushed me away from Christianity. I hate the idea that you have to belong to a select group to be given eternal redemption. The whole idea that you can be a truly good person, but NOT be Christian, and for that reason alone end up in Hell...just always bothered me.

So people are condemned to burn in fire for all eternity because they were born gay? Not very moral.

That's why many Christians believe that if you're gay, you CHOOSE to be gay.

Why should people be forced to worship something they don't even know exists?

Christians will respond in one word: Faith.

What gets me on this one is that a Christian that commited 30 murders can go to heaven, while an atheist that has done many charitable deeds throughtout his or her life goes straight to hell when they die. Can anyone not see the inequality in this? How is that moral? How is that fair?

Actually, the murderer would have to ask for forgiveness before they die to be accepted into Heaven. Don't take the 2 seconds to do that, and he's in Hell with the heathens.

And they were banished for sinning, without even knowing about sin.

They were specifically told not to eat an apple, and after Mr. Snake tempted them, they ate it. Hence the banishment. They knew it was wrong, but did it anyway (or at least that's what I was always taught).

because Eve "sinned" first. This is sexist.

It's not sexist if it's a fact. If you take the Bible as a fact, then it's just what happened. The only people that find fault with it are the people who aren't devout Christians. I don't like the fact that women are responsible for EVERYTHING bad in the Bible. And you have to keep in mind that in every faith, there has to be explanations for everything. This explains women getting periods.

Ladies, do you think you should be forced to unconditionally listen to your husbands/future husbands(if you get one) ?

And from these words was born...feminism.

But wait a minute. I thought God was perfect?! Well, apparently not.

Reason #2 why I turned away from Christianity.

Yet God did it tons of times in the Bible.

But He's GOD. He's infallible. HE'S UBER.

And aah,the old "literal argument" translation. I use the King James version, which is the best translation into English. Other versions like to whitewash the atrocities God committed in stories.

That is NOT the best translation, it's just the most accepted. It was in turn translated from Greek...which was translated from Hebraic. And I'm sure I'm missing a step or two. The translation argument is very valid, but the major concepts survived the butchering between languages.

But see, I'm agnostic. I was taught most of the major Bible stuff as a kid through various sources. And I've grown up with devout Christians my entire life. When I was a kid I was the ONLY one that didn't go to church. It's fun being non-Christian in the Bible Belt.

 

[The Big Al]

The King James version is a big piece of political spin. It was written so James could justify his monarchy (kind of like how you're trying to justify your atheism with this thread). I would like to get my hands on another translation and see the differences.

 

[PsiUmbreon]

Al, the translations after KJV whitewash the stories, and make them less dramatic, and attribute less kills to God. And my atheism is justified with far more than just this thread. You haven't met the tip of the iceberg behind my atheism.

 

[Josh]

And how about the nonbelievers? People who were born into a different faith, or people who decided to be atheist? Their "crime" is not worshipping God. How is that immoral? Why should people be forced to worship something they don't even know exists?

We're all equal under the eyes of God, so technically it shouldn't matter if we belieive or not. However it does because the bible seems to enjoy contradicting itself. Disbeleif is a result of free will apparentley. Now, if god wanted us all to beleive in him, he would've most likely set a parameter on free will that forced this. Free will has parameters as it was given, the parameters are just minimal and un-noticable. Also, if God did not want his people to fall into the 'evil path' and not beleive in him, why did he give free will anyway? He, being omniscent would've known what was to happen would, however he did nothing to stop it and would rather let his creations go to hell. But he loves us all...

What gets me on this one is that a Christian that commited 30 murders can go to heaven, while an atheist that has done many charitable deeds throughtout his or her life goes straight to hell when they die. Can anyone not see the inequality in this? How is that moral? How is that fair?

True again. A Christian would only need to go to a confessional and poof! sins are erased, how can that be so? You don't see criminals going to a judge saying, 'yep I did it' and then being allowed to go free do you? If God is a judge then he should judge fairly. Because we're all equal under his eyes, although christians getting special treatment from him and indeed other members of the faith does not make that so. Also, continuing the equality arguement, why is there a religious hierarchy? With the pope at the top etc? We're all equal aren't we?

Secondly, I would like to expose the immorality involved in the story of Adam and Eve. Now, according to the Bible, Adam and Eve were banished from the garden for disobeying God. Now, there is supposedly no sin in the Garden of Eden, right? Then how could they have sinned? Did they even know what sin was? How could someone commit a sin without it even existing? And they were banished for sinning, without even knowing about sin.

How can someone beleive in god without knowing oof his existence. God created sin, so technically God is the one responisble for all the sin since Genesis. If God created everything then he created Ying-Yang, so, he is responsible for all the evil in the world. You can't argue by saying humans created this through use of their free will because that's a contradiction to the bible stating God created everything.

Now, any female should instantly be outraged by this one. After Adam and Eve "sinned", God punished them by banishing them, and making them experience pain. Furthermore, God proclaimed that from then on, all women were to be subject to their husbands, and that they would be subject to the pain of childbirth, because Eve "sinned" first. This is sexist. According to the scripture, it is a woman's fault we're all banished from the garden, and women now have to listen to men forever, and endure the pain of childbirth. Ladies, do you think you should be forced to unconditionally listen to your husbands/future husbands(if you get one) ?

One of my favourtie websites,
http://www.thebricktestament.com/epistles_of_paul/instructions_for_women/1co11_04.html
Gives some really god biblical references to the fact that God sees men as above women. Thereby giving a breach of equality.

Finally, I would like to point out that throughout the Bible, God kills many people, including innocent ones. The biggest example of this is the great flood story in Genesis. God got mad at the world, because people were sinning. So he decided to kill everyone except Noah and his family by drowning them. Everyone. Oh, and every animal except for two. Do you think it's right to kill people for doing wrong? KILL them? And what about the babies and animals that didn't supposedly make it out onto the ark? Do you think it's right that God killed everyone? EVERYONE?

Point well made. Everyone bar a small family and those animals. How did all the other animals sin? Every human couldn;t have sinned, yet he demolished the earth as if it were nothing in this story... also, how can two families re-populate the earth? That alone hinder's the Noah story further.

But wait a minute. I thought God was perfect?! Well, apparently not.

You'll get so many arguements upon this it'll be ridiculous.

He also said it is not an excuse to sin. I doubt the "your gay, so you're going to Hell" bit. Homosexuality is no greater sin than stealing from the corner store

Yet the bible seems to make a massive point of it being wrong...

In the garden of Eden, Lucifer assumed the form of the serpant. He had already disobeyed God and therefore brought corruption upon his creation.

If God hadn't created sin then this wouldn't have happened.

A lot of things that you meantioned were the basic excuses of atheist.

So what are your excuses for being Christian?
What do you make of this?

But I guess I'm kind of freaked out, because I don't want to go to hell. But if I only believe in God because I don't want to go to hell... That doesn't seem like a good reason to believe in a kind/loving God. =/

That is from another thread, but it does hold true to a lot of christians. Note the part's I bolded.
Also, apologies to Cold Katangirl for using this, however I thought it as the best way to make my point.

 

[Barb]

It can be said that Christianity is a moral religion. However, not all Christians have morals. What did the founder of Christianity say? "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." How is this immoral? When asked what the two greatest commandments were, the founder replied: "Love God with your whole heart, soul, and mind, and the second is this: love your neighbor as yourself." How is this immoral?

 

[Fig]

Excellent point, Barb.

Too bad just about everyone else who contributed to the NT seemed hell-bent on diverting the message to their own end, and that it's THEY, rather than Jesus, whom most people pay attention to.

(the OT is something else entirely, and it should be kept in mind that it predates christianty entirely. It's a damn shame christians decided to keep it among their holy books).

 

[The Big Al]

I was not talking about after KJV I'm talking about before, the King James Version and versions afterwards have been vitim to spin (you are right about that). However, what about before hand? Actually, from the very start the bible (and all relgious texts) have been subject to political spin and alterations. At least we can hope that the general message is still intact.

 

[Checkmate]

This is my brief post. I don't tend to do a lot of posting on Mondays and this is no exception. So I will merely say a few things.

a) Psi Umbreon your entire opening post is based on one premise. You are basically assuming that your knowledge, and your opinions are the end-all, be-all. You probably disagree. Think about it. You are calling God immoral because he doesn't agree with you. You think that as long as something does not hurt someone it is not wrong. You also think that this is undoubtedly the foundational premise of all morals. You probably have not thought about this but in all actuality you are quite arrogant.

And in response to the premis that if you don't hurt anyone it's okay, I have this to say. What is it to hurt someone? Does a parent not hurt their child when they spank them? Does the child not even go so far as to claim that the parent in question does not love them?

Yet in truth, the spanking is done because the parent does love them. The parent loves the child enough to spank them. They love them so much that despite the child's crying, yelling, and anger the parent spanks them anyway knowing that it is better for them in the long run. This is not an analogy, it's an illustration.

It illustrates that the parent is smarter than the child and knows more about love, and morality than the child does. Likewise, you and I, insignificant little ants (and that is a positive exaggeration of our position) cannot claim to know more about morality than the God who invented morals.

You cannot claim to know more about physics than the God who created the laws thereof, you cannot claim to know more about the universe than the One who layed the foundations thereof, and you cannot claim to know more about what is good for a human than the God who created man in His own image.

Out of respect for you PsiUmbreon I will respond to some of your individual points later on.

And also... Damian... I thought you were out of religious debates.

 

[Unregistered]

the point most people are trying to make about the whole "poof your sins are forgiven" facotr is that one must actually feel remorse about ones sins they can not simply use this to go to heaven if you arent sorry for your sins you are not firgiven.

 

[Fig]

Checkmate - in, out, it depends on my moods. Some months I just don't bother, others, I randomly check them.

*shrugs*

 

[GrnMarvl14]

Also, continuing the equality arguement, why is there a religious hierarchy? With the pope at the top etc?

Well, the pope is supposed to represent God's wishes on Earth, and as such, the people put him up in a higher position. Add to that human nature and the ideal that "power corrupts"...I take it to being a good idea gone bad...like so many things in the Bible.

Gives some really god biblical references to the fact that God sees men as above women. Thereby giving a breach of equality.

But the Bible was written by man, not God. Who's to say that some artistic license didn't go in? I'm not defending Christianity, but I'm making sure people keep open minds about things.

how can two families re-populate the earth? That alone hinder's the Noah story further.

Really? But the idea that two people are responsible for all of humanity is ok?

How about the fact that incest is wrong, yet if humanity started with just two people...incest HAD to happen.

How did all the other animals sin? Every human couldn;t have sinned, yet he demolished the earth as if it were nothing in this story

Animals are looked down upon in EVERY ancient religion. Maybe there's one that doesn't...but I can't think of it.

Yet the bible seems to make a massive point of it being wrong...

Nooooo...over-inflated, self-righteous Christians make a massive point of it being wrong.

Too bad just about everyone else who contributed to the NT seemed hell-bent on diverting the message to their own end, and that it's THEY, rather than Jesus, whom most people pay attention to.

I don't think a better statement has been said in this discussion.

The parent loves the child enough to spank them

I will forever call that logic...illogical. Now give me a second, I have to go shoot the president. Not because I don't like him...but because I LOVE him.

It illustrates that the parent is smarter than the child and knows more about love, and morality than the child does.

And yet...who has sinned more? Wasn't it Jesus who said "let he who hath not sinned cast the first stone"?

You cannot claim to know more about physics than the God who created the laws thereof

Wasn't there a time when the idea of gravity was seen as blasphemous? Can't the same be true of ANYTHING not looked upon favorably by Christians today? And if this entire time the Christians called something that wasn't really bad bad, then couldn't anything they call good not really be good? We seem to just interpret morals as we see fit, so who's to say that if God exists that he's not ABOVE morality.

 

[bell02+]

The King James version is a big piece of political spin. It was written so James could justify his monarchy (kind of like how you're trying to justify your atheism with this thread). I would like to get my hands on another translation and see the differences.

Yeah, this is actually true. I believe it is one thing you learn in history class. Also I don't believe I said that word for word in a literal state the bible was great in any language. I said that you can't go word for word on it because of translations, good or bad. No matter how you translate something it can't be 100% accurate. Then also you have the case that the bible was made for it's time. That why it is the morals and tales that are learned.

I believe the original writers had to write the bible in their own words. It's hard to understand this comment, but I believe that God has no voice, and all things holy have no real voice, reason being is how different the books are from each other, especially in the new testiment. This is kind of hard to understand, it's hard for me to explain .

Sure, if you take literals, you'll find lots of things wrong and dated in the bible, eye for an eye and such, but any preist will tell you in their own way that it is the ideas you should take from it to apply to life: "love thy neighbor" and such.

Also there is the fact that the bible is of hystory. Some people agrue against it saying slavery, murder, anti-femenism is influnced, a lot of the time, those parts are just part of the story telling what happend or having something being referenced to the time. As stated, there were many powerful women in the bible, and many belief's proven wrong.

psiUmbereon, sorry for offending you with the word excuse, but to reject (or accept) something you need one. My original excuse is because I'm born into it and I don't feel like being almost disowned by becoming atheist. However I also have other reasons for staying, and other reasons for holding my own beliefs and interpretations of the bible, however those are more personal and I could only proove to you in person anyways.

I'll be back for more, give me a few hours because I have to go out for a while (these topics really are fun with open minded people). I know most people are probably happy I'm busy so I can't post my famous page long post, but watch out you'll get yours!;-)

 

[The Big Al]

In the Lutheran Church we don't have a heirarchy. We have a board that manages the secular issues of the church but we don't have a supreme relgious leader like the Pope. I suggest you keep the blanket statements in check.

 

[bell02+]

Really? But the idea that two people are responsible for all of humanity is ok?

Actually the idea of having a small population to create all that is modern humanity makes Evolution believable. I find it really hard to believe that a large group of any animal was able to develop the same traits naturally. It kind of goes agaisnt evolution's theory because those that weren't born with the features of modern man died out. This in the same sense supports at how adam and eve could have been viewed at a modern stand point.

The bible doesn't say but who said that God couldn't have experimented with the creation of man. These experiments could very well be the vision of evolution, there is no proof anganst it.(tip, don't bring-up the 7 days thing, because I've had a reply for this for years.) It's not imperfction, but preference. The bible already tells us God has preferences (even if you only look at the Ten Commandments, God prefers that people fallow them, preference).

How about the fact that incest is wrong, yet if humanity started with just two people...incest HAD to happen.

It is kind of wrong, but no matter how you look at it it's been done to help species get to where they are, however, overly doing incest (especially at this modern age) is not a good thing. Now I can't say this statement with certianty because I don't know 100% of the world's culture, but I believe this is part of Human instinct.

We all know the physical results to inbreeding, it'll cause deformites and overall weakness. This leads one to believe it is the primal urge for mankind to survive to use this as a last result to keeping a species alive.

I think this can probably be applied to homosexuallity. I personally oppose anti-gay people, but I can understand why the feelings exist. I believe it has something to do with mankind's instinct to survive, like people's feelings to make love.

Animals are looked down upon in EVERY ancient religion. Maybe there's one that doesn't...but I can't think of it.

This is somethinf I never really liked, but I feel that just has something to do with writer's opinions (but only a bit though) because you can quote examples from the bible easily that how god cares for all of god's creations. I think that makes this a more difficult topic. This also goes into the topic of what has a soul, what goes to heaven, and possibilites of other life forms exsisting billions of miles away.

One more note I'll make right now is the requirements to get into heaven. I believe after jesus died it was a lot simpler before. The bible says that it made it possible for man to get there but I don't think it's 100% accurate because it doesn't make since if you think about those important before like Moses, Noah, and those who died but did such things as appear to jesus.

I believe after there is just more of a measuring system, you don't believe in god, yet you help others for the rest of your life.. you'll probably go to heaven because your good out weighs the bad. You commit to being a gay couple practicing in love making, yet you are still a good person who does normal things such as charity to less fortunate and helping those in need: you go to heaven. If you murder someone and repent for the rest of your life... it's possible. I think it's really difficult, but the point of Jesus was to help former sinners get into heaven.

The idea of all these people can't go to heaven rooted from man. Man using such for evil, doing bad in the name of christianity. It's the fault of the seven deadly sins that do this. They don't so much harm you in the afterlife so much as in life too. Ideas of Greed, and Pride are things that start war, and prejudice. The seven deadly sins are what can bring man to it's own distruction. I think that is why the were meantioned in the first place because it is that that needs to be worried the most and what causes a mortal sin.
(^^ that paragraph sounded like a bad line form an RPG, or Anime character)


The difficult topic is that of if animals can go. I believe they do, but I haven no proof, it's just more of a faith.

 

[GrnMarvl14]

This in the same sense supports at how adam and eve could have been viewed at a modern stand point.

Now see, from an evolutionary standpoint, you could always just say that Adam and Eve were the first to be born that we would call human. The Bible presents them as the first (although...wasn't Lilith human? Or was she a "fictional" character added in later literature?) humans, and they were locked away in a little garden. But there could always be the idea that they were just the first, and other followed. Maybe even shortly after. That keeps evolution possible without contradicting the Bible too much.

The bible doesn't say but who said that God couldn't have experimented with the creation of man.

See, that's why my personal belief is that we're the result of an alien experiment. There's even a tribe in North America whose origin story could EASILY be interpreted as that of aliens creating man. But that's just me spouting off random stuff.

but I believe this is part of Human instinct.

It's not just human instinct. There are numerous animal species that, even in limited populations, don't practice incest. Of course, for every animal species you can identify in one category, there's another that could easily fall into the other.

I believe after there is just more of a measuring system, you don't believe in god, yet you help others for the rest of your life.. you'll probably go to heaven because your good out weighs the bad.

Exactly. If I were to express the belief I have about the afterlife, that would be it. I think that in the end, all that matters is that you were a good person. There's an obvious line between a bad person and a good person. While specific things could be debated, it's very hard to put a life up for debate. Most people are obviously either good or bad. They may stray from one to the other, but the majority of their life will be spent at least ATTEMPTING one or the other.