Why is (perceived?) religious inconsistency upsetting?

[wynn]

This was inspired by Superluminal's recent thread on what religionists base their behavior on.


Questions:

How come so many people become so upset when someone claims to be a follower of religion or philosophy X, but doesn't quite seem to actually be/act like a follower of religion or philosophy X?

How come even hardcore atheists get angry when someone who claims to be a Christian doesn't quite live up to some Christian ideal?

Why is (perceived?) religious inconsistency upsetting?
Or why/under what circumstances it is not upsetting?

 

[jayleew]

This was inspired by Superluminal's recent thread on what religionists base their behavior on.


Questions:

How come so many people become so upset when someone claims to be a follower of religion or philosophy X, but doesn't quite seem to actually be/act like a follower of religion or philosophy X?

How come even hardcore atheists get angry when someone who claims to be a Christian doesn't quite live up to some Christian ideal?

Why is (perceived?) religious inconsistency upsetting?
Or why/under what circumstances it is not upsetting?

It is upsetting to me because most of them are ignorant of any other theory that contradicts their truth. They hold to X ideal, and won't even think of budging. And if they won't budge on X ideal, what about the Y ideal which says you are to kill Z when A happens. Then, I start to worry about others because I was hurt before by ignorance like this. How many churches split per day? Pride and all its children like ignorance and arrogance hurt people. I get upset because of the hurt that that person might cause somebody just because they wouldn't listen.

 

[Doreen]

Questions:

How come so many people become so upset when someone claims to be a follower of religion or philosophy X, but doesn't quite seem to actually be/act like a follower of religion or philosophy X?

How come even hardcore atheists get angry when someone who claims to be a Christian doesn't quite live up to some Christian ideal?

Why is (perceived?) religious inconsistency upsetting?
Or why/under what circumstances it is not upsetting?

I get upset around this issue because I feel like people are not taking responsibility while at the same time holding this up as an ideal. I think part of my reaction is because, despite being spiritual, I cannot simply refer to a book as an authority. And even if I could, I would still feel responsble for choosing to believe such a book 100% correct. I would consider this a huge self-affirmation - I have the abiilty to recognize the truth in that way.

So to me people who refuse to fully confront such contradictions are not standing with me. Sure we might disagree on what is the truth, but at least we are taking a stand of self-affirmation, openly and to a similar degree. I think this feels dangerous and is in a sense risky. But for me the truth is, they are taking such a stand, but not admitting it.

It seems a cake and eat it too situation, but worse it makes it seem like I am an exception - read: target.

I think that is the root for me.

I see nothing wrong with deciding what kind of Christian one feels is right -iow not necessarily taking all parts of the Bible as perfect. This is pretty common in life, where we find experts or references and use not necessarily all of their wisdom or purported knowledge as correct, but still are inspired by and try on various suggestions for thoughts and practices because of these people or references we consider expert.

In regard to 'hardcore atheists' I suspect that the religious person 1) is seen as not giving in to the kind of logic the atheist thinks he or she follows and 2) is playing a role for the atheist. The atheist gets to be the rational person and have irrationality 'out there', not part of them. They can define themselves as not like that and this can be seen by the form of our struggle. I present logic, they refuse to acknowledge this. But at the same time, I think there can be a genuine urge to show them the light. That they also hope that the religious person will go 'Oh, my goodness, you're right." This would be satisfying for various reasons. IOW I am saying it is not simply a role play where the person prefers the other person to remain the irrational one. I think not getting to that satisfaction, satisfaction which it seems should be easily achievable, is frustrating.

 

[iceaura]

Because organized political influence that overtly refuses to answer to reason - ie maintain "consistency" - is subject only to power. That is a threat.

 

[Adstar]

This was inspired by Superluminal's recent thread on what religionists base their behavior on.


Questions:

How come so many people become so upset when someone claims to be a follower of religion or philosophy X, but doesn't quite seem to actually be/act like a follower of religion or philosophy X?

How come even hardcore atheists get angry when someone who claims to be a Christian doesn't quite live up to some Christian ideal?

Maybe a few different reasons.

They could perceive that the religious beliefs and standards come from the religious and therefore they perceive that the failure to live up to the standard is hypocrisy. That these religious people are saying do as i say not as i do.

As a follower of the Messiah Jesus i am a messenger of His message so the message does not come from me. As a follower of Jesus i already know i cannot live up to the standard of God. The standard is not about living up to it. The standard is about revealing to people that they all fall short of the standard and need the atonement of Jesus to have their failure to achieve the standard covered.

Another reason is pride. Many people believe that if there is a standard then they should be able through self-disapline to live up to it. When they come to a standard that is too high and they fail it no matter how much they try, instead of admitting that there is a standard they cannot achieve they turn and attack the standard as being wrong or evil or false. Rather like a person who hears a beautiful flute player and seeks to learn how to play, but because of a lack of musical ability they fail dismally with the instrument. They throw away the instrument with anger and whenever they hear a flute being played they now hate it because it reminds them of their failure.

Why is (perceived?) religious inconsistency upsetting?
Or why/under what circumstances it is not upsetting?

It is perceived upsetting when it is perceived that it is a teaching that is to be lived up too. If the teaching cannot be lived up to, by the one giving the message or the one receiving the message then it can end in no other outcome other than upset.

But it is not perceived as upsetting if one sees it as a perfect ideal that is an inspiration to strive for while at the same time not being a goal needing to be achieved. And of course the entire message that includes forgiveness for falling short of perfection brings joy and peace. So the admiration for the perfection of the truth can be joined with the Joy of forgiveness for those who agree with the truth.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[glaucon]

How come so many people become so upset when someone claims to be a follower of religion or philosophy X, but doesn't quite seem to actually be/act like a follower of religion or philosophy X?

How come even hardcore atheists get angry when someone who claims to be a Christian doesn't quite live up to some Christian ideal?

Why is (perceived?) religious inconsistency upsetting?
Or why/under what circumstances it is not upsetting?

Signal,

I have to admit I'm surprised at you here.

Surely you understand that inconsistency in behaviour is aberrant?
We call it insanity.

Thus, it upsets those who do not suffer so.

 

[wynn]

Signal,

I have to admit I'm surprised at you here.

Surely you understand that inconsistency in behaviour is aberrant?
We call it insanity.

Thus, it upsets those who do not suffer so.

Glaucon,


Surely you understand that thinking oneself consistent is hubris.

 

[S.A.M.]

This was inspired by Superluminal's recent thread on what religionists base their behavior on.


Questions:

How come so many people become so upset when someone claims to be a follower of religion or philosophy X, but doesn't quite seem to actually be/act like a follower of religion or philosophy X?

Its quite simple, its because atheists too have an ideal view of religion. Note that they rate their own behaviour against that of theists and attempt to show how they are "better", better being a subjective view of moral goodness, which is a religious concept. In their own mind, theists fail to meet the standards they have set of moral goodness. Basically its the same ole, same ole of "my religion is better than your religion"

 

[Doreen]

Glaucon,


Surely you understand that thinking oneself consistent is hubris.

I would add that sometimes apparant consistency and a (too early) striving to be consistent can be based on a misunderstanding of how 'it' is really consistent at a deeper level already. (particles/waves, self care/kindness to others) thus the desire for consistency can be a kind of fascism no one can live up to. Of course this can be used as an excuse for hypocrisy. And there's the rub. Many rules should be broken but only by some people.

 

[Lori_7]

This was inspired by Superluminal's recent thread on what religionists base their behavior on.


Questions:

How come so many people become so upset when someone claims to be a follower of religion or philosophy X, but doesn't quite seem to actually be/act like a follower of religion or philosophy X?

How come even hardcore atheists get angry when someone who claims to be a Christian doesn't quite live up to some Christian ideal?

Why is (perceived?) religious inconsistency upsetting?
Or why/under what circumstances it is not upsetting?

if i had to guess, it's probably because a lot of religious people are judgmental in regards to "non-believers".

it might also be because many atheists are authorities on religion ironically. it's how they argue against it and make their case. i don't think in this case they get angry or upset, but they get excited.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

it might also be because many atheists are authorities on religion ironically. it's how they argue against it and make their case. i don't think in this case they get angry or upset, but they get excited.

*************
M*W: Finding out the truth is exciting! We just want to share that truth with the grossly misinformed.

Personally, I don't get angry, because I used to be one of those bible thumping christians. It may have taken years to become an atheist, but that is a slow process. I don't judge christians like many on this forum may think. I understand the process takes a while.

 

[Doreen]

*************
M*W: Finding out the truth is exciting! We just want to share that truth with the grossly misinformed.

I thought atheism was only a lack of belief in God. I didn't realize that atheists must want to proselytize. I could swear that when the topic comes up here - as to what an atheist is - the only common feature, as claimed by atheists, is this lack of belief.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

I thought atheism was only a lack of belief in God. I didn't realize that atheists must want to proselytize. I could swear that when the topic comes up here - as to what an atheist is - the only common feature, as claimed by atheists, is this lack of belief.

*************
M*W: Doreen, get a life.

 

[glaucon]

Glaucon,


Surely you understand that thinking oneself consistent is hubris.

Not at all.
There can only be one person that can control one's consistency in behaviour: oneself. Given that, there's no crime to be found in judging oneself to be sane.
To qualify as hubris, that claim would have to be either incorrect, or to be used as something to characterize others as being in some way inferior.

 

[glaucon]

...thus the desire for consistency can be a kind of fascism no one can live up to.

That may be so, though I don't think that's determinable. More to the point however, that doesn't mean we cannot, or should not aspire.

 

[lightgigantic]

This was inspired by Superluminal's recent thread on what religionists base their behavior on.


Questions:

How come so many people become so upset when someone claims to be a follower of religion or philosophy X, but doesn't quite seem to actually be/act like a follower of religion or philosophy X?

How come even hardcore atheists get angry when someone who claims to be a Christian doesn't quite live up to some Christian ideal?

Why is (perceived?) religious inconsistency upsetting?
Or why/under what circumstances it is not upsetting?

In short, the higher the ideal, the less likely that people in general will be able to act according to it, and hence the higher level of hypocrisy.

This doesn't make the act of religion more faulty ... it just means that it entertains a wider opportunity for fault finding .... and if one is predisposed to fault finding one can discredit any discipline or creed, since bad examples are prevalent anywhere.

 

[jahina]

*************
M*W: Finding out the truth is exciting! We just want to share that truth with the grossly misinformed.

Personally, I don't get angry, because I used to be one of those bible thumping christians. It may have taken years to become an atheist, but that is a slow process. I don't judge christians like many on this forum may think. I understand the process takes a while.

Yep, absolutely agree that finding out the truth is exciting.

In my case, though, I was an athiest and through that same slow process came to realise that God and Creation ARE the truth.

So, I COULD, if I were judgemental, regard YOU as the grossly informed. But I try not to judge others as this is spiritually damaging.

 

[wynn]

Come to think of it -

Why is (perceived?) religious inconsistency upsetting?
Or why/under what circumstances it is not upsetting?

As far as I can see, I become upset when I perceive religious inconsistency because a situation of (perceived) inconsistency means I would have to choose whether to trust those people and to what extent and what consequences this would have for me. And I find that extremely upsetting.


If someone seems perfect, I feel no responsibility about trusting them, I simply trust them.

 

[Lori_7]

Come to think of it -


As far as I can see, I become upset when I perceive religious inconsistency because a situation of (perceived) inconsistency means I would have to choose whether to trust those people and to what extent and what consequences this would have for me. And I find that extremely upsetting.


If someone seems perfect, I feel no responsibility about trusting them, I simply trust them.

Are you saying that you know perfect people? And why do you feel the need to trust people in this regard? Is it about having faith in people instead of god?

 

[Lori_7]

*************
M*W: Finding out the truth is exciting! We just want to share that truth with the grossly misinformed.

Personally, I don't get angry, because I used to be one of those bible thumping christians. It may have taken years to become an atheist, but that is a slow process. I don't judge christians like many on this forum may think. I understand the process takes a while.

What truth?

And are you trying to be sarcastic and patronizing or are you really this dense?