The most narrow minded ignorant thing you've heard a religious person say?

sowhatifit'sdark said:
Weakest in what sense? My guess would be: to attack, for example. But I'm not sure.
Click to expand...

Yes, weakest in that it is the most vulnerable, easy to manipulate.
Or, to use another metaphor: The verbal is for me like a velcro net: everything catches on to it, and then I'm left with a load of junk.


I think one could hold a mirror up to their attitudes - or vibe, tone of voice, role in relating - and ask if it they are treating others as they would like to be treated. Of course it is easy for them to be slippery. I am not suggesting this as a way to change Christians' habits, but to reiterate that there is something 'on the surface' that does not fit and not simply something in the 'depths' that one is guessing about.
Click to expand...

Being more judicious and taking differences seriously (instead of blaming them on oneself) seems like a necessary step if one's goal is happiness and quality of life ...
And yes, the "surface" is often clear, expressive enough - "These are the sorts of people I do not wish to spend my time with". Sometimes too terrifying to accept that one has found oneself in close relationships with people whom one doesn't really want to be with at all.


Yes, it can get rather smarmy. And the surprise when, for example, they meet anger, when they were simply spreading God's word or being loving is.....I don't know, part of the problem. The lack of awareness.
Click to expand...

Christianity strikes me as extremely solipsistic. It's as if for Christians, the rest of the world does not really exist, or exists only as they say it does.

This is very noticeable in the way many Christians impute motivations on others, and insist in them, regardless what the other person might say or do.
"If you don't believe in God, it's because you don't want to believe in God" - and this is it for them.


Of course I think this is true of many intellectual non-religious who see the Christians, especially fundamentalists as second class citizens.
Click to expand...

There's this notion of superiority around, often. I'm afraid that usually, it really is just a superiority complex, not superiority.


This sounds like a pattern you see in many families and romantic relationships.
How unpleasant. Because to bring it up, well, it feels shameful somehow. Like a victim to link to the other thread. And greedy or needy or materialistic. And then the response back is likely not to be satisfying. Like, Oh, gosh, I can see how you feel about that. It's a different kind of friendship, but here's what I really appreciate about you....with real feeling. I would expect something indirect, not quite getting it, at best. Worse a direct guilt trip.
Click to expand...

It's basically that they want to set the terms of the relationship and the other person should conform. It is the same structure of relationship as with God: God unilaterally sets the terms and obligations; there is no mutual agreement; if you don't get along, you're bad and should be ashamed of yourself.
 
greenberg said:
It's basically that they want to set the terms of the relationship and the other person should conform. It is the same structure of relationship as with God: God unilaterally sets the terms and obligations; there is no mutual agreement; if you don't get along, you're bad and should be ashamed of yourself.
Click to expand...

Well said. I mean one should have the integrity to believe in a good God and one that truly would be good to relate to. Or at least yearn for one and grieve that you have the one you have. (given you believe) It is the same as a government leader or a workplace manager. One should hope for someone who uses power fairly and with love when possible and does not expect radical submission. Especially a leader who wants to be called Father.
What father would send his kids to be tortured for all time. Ah, well, there are some, but these are not role models.
 
greenberg said:
Yes, weakest in that it is the most vulnerable, easy to manipulate.
Or, to use another metaphor: The verbal is for me like a velcro net: everything catches on to it, and then I'm left with a load of junk.
Click to expand...

That's clear. I get that. I had that with vibe. People's vibe, especially those portions that were aimed at me. I simply took it in. No boundary. I remember telling this to a therapist, sometime like: I mean you just have to take that shit in. And the way he looked at me helped me. He couldn't even find the words, but I got it in his reaction. 'Oh, but you don't have to take it in' his body language said, along with concern. From that second forward I took tiny steps not taking it in, experimenting with a boundary. On some level, you could say I thought having a boundary was a sin.
 
sowhatifit'sdark said:
That's clear. I get that. I had that with vibe. People's vibe, especially those portions that were aimed at me. I simply took it in. No boundary. I remember telling this to a therapist, sometime like: I mean you just have to take that shit in. And the way he looked at me helped me. He couldn't even find the words, but I got it in his reaction. 'Oh, but you don't have to take it in' his body language said, along with concern.
Click to expand...

I had almost the same situation. Except that my counselor actually put it in words - "You don't have to take it in".
But she also said that what other people say and do is their business - and this is where I am torn because:
1. Other people might be superior to me, so what they say and do could be my business. When it comes to spiritual superiority, this might be tricky.
2. If what other people say and do is their business, then how is one supposed to engage in relationships with them, on the grounds of what?


On some level, you could say I thought having a boundary was a sin.
Click to expand...

I can relate to this.
 
DAVIDON4U said:
The BIBLE does'nt say the earth is 6000 years old thats a lie.Evolution is taught in the BIBLE. Once the BIBLE is taught correctly all will see its parralel coarse with science
Click to expand...

Well, you certainly held true to the thread title. Congratulations!
 
DAVIDON4U said:
The BIBLE does'nt say the earth is 6000 years old thats a lie.Evolution is taught in the BIBLE. Once the BIBLE is taught correctly all will see its parralel coarse with science
Click to expand...

All true science is based on the firm foundation of the bible, that infallible guide to the universe and everything beyond.
 
DAVIDON4U said:
The BIBLE does'nt say the earth is 6000 years old thats a lie.Evolution is taught in the BIBLE. Once the BIBLE is taught correctly all will see its parralel coarse with science
Click to expand...

True. Genesis is a story of gradual development over time. However, with all the other stuff about Noah, which is at least a partial fabrication, the bible is a less than trustworthy scientific reference. If it were a peer reviewed paper, it would not get publication.
 
spidergoat said:
True. Genesis is a story of gradual development over time. However, with all the other stuff about Noah, which is at least a partial fabrication, the bible is a less than trustworthy scientific reference. If it were a peer reviewed paper, it would not get publication.
Click to expand...

It certainly would be published. How about the Christian Science Monitor. the Pastor Phelps exigesis , to name but two ?
 
Hmm soooooo! atheists are just athiests to Christianity, secretly they are all practising Islam.

Welcome to the jihad, brothers! :D

er, and sisters (some misogyny is essential here, to keep up appearances)
 
S.A.M. said:
I don't hate homosexuals, I hate homosexuality.

This can also be substituted by:

I don't hate theists, I hate theism, which would make it the stupidest thing said by a religious atheist.
Click to expand...

There is a term used in Christianity which goes like "Hate the sin, love the sinner"


It's quaint that Islam has concluded this also.
 
To answer the OP:

I had a Jehovah Witness knock on me door:

I pointed out a bit of scripture that Paul said, about one body having many members.

She asked me what my religion was.

I said Protestant (which I don't hold now)

She walked up my path (she was about 80) waving her finger calling me a prostitute.
 
S.A.M. said:
atheists are just athiests to Christianity
Click to expand...

This is probably true to a large extent.
The Western usual atheist is an atheist specifically in relation to Christian theism, but not necessarily to all other theisms.

The Western atheism phenomenon seems to have developed mostly in reply to Christianity, in reply to issues specifically brought up by fire and brimstone Christianese, hence Western atheism's focus on fear, guilt and blind faith.

I think the Western usual atheist is hardly an atheist to, for example, Krishna. The usual Western atheism's arguments against theism hardly apply to Hinduism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top