I Won't Joke About Jesus Or 'take The Mickey' Even Though I No Longer Believe.

[BlackCat]

When I was still a Chrisitan, during one of my more 'optimistic' periods, I ventured onto the Richard Dawkins's atheist forum- this would be about 4 years ago (it got took down after this).  Boy were there some nasty people on there, who only served to strengthen my faith- as Bhim pointed out. They hindered my journey to find the truth.   

 

The main thing that enabled me to start distancing myself from Christianity and the people (Christians) who exerted their influence over me, was my utter rejection of the hell doctrine.  I remember many a passionate conversation with various church members, regarding the evil doctrine of hell.  Only one person has ever agreed with me.  

 

 We have a local Christian book shop in our town.  It's also a cafe, and so I made friends with one of the volunteers there.  I remember trying to discuss hell with her.  I just couldn't get through to her, how evil this teaching was.  Eventually she asked me not to mention it again, as it made her feel churned up.  I know why she felt like this, but she isn't ready to face why.  So, I didn't mention it again.  No, I wouldn't mock Christians personally.  They don't know they're so deceived.   

[SquareOne]

No, I wouldn't mock Christians personally.  They don't know they're so deceived.   

 

That's a good point.

 

It's a bit like mocking someone with a mental illness for having a mental illness.  To a large extent, they can't help it.  Christians have been indoctrinated with lies and are fiercely loyal to their imaginary father.

[RipVanWinkle]

BlackCat: You make an excellent point which I have tried to make, but not so clearly as you did. bill

[boftx]

Your status in Hell depends on the size of the honor guard you bring with you.

[Vigile]

I personally don't mock people in general.  The belief system isn't the person, so while the belief system is vile, xians are not necessarily so. 

 

I'd point out that it's not our job to evangelize though.  Some may wish to be the salt of the ex-christian world, but that's not me.  People's decoversion pretty much depends on their own personal character and readiness. 

[Bhim]

Bhim: I pretty much agree with you in principle, but the hard headed Xtians will simply not concede any fact or truth that they perceive to be inconsistent with their rigid beliefs. Believe me, I have heard their inflexible responses first hand many times. The better educated they are the more rigid they become. They use their good brains to

rationalize, not to seek the truth because they have convinced themselves that they

know all the truth they need in order to please god.

 

So (and I'm not exaggerating) if, for example, you have pointed out two verses in the

bible which are clearly inconsistent with each other, their response will

something-anything that,if true,would make the verses consistent with each other,

no matter how absurd that something might be. I have seen apologists' books that advise christians to interpret the bible in just that way. Why? Because they "know" that the

bible is divinely inspired, with no mistakes. So the bible cannot be inconsistent with

itself. It's crazy, I know, but that is their approach. So appealing to Xtiians'

reasonable side is a noble goal, but unlikely to succeed at best. bill

 

True, Bill.  I'm totally agreed that Christians are the masters of rationalization and won't respond to these arguments.  But Christians do respond to personal conscience.  That's why they don't believe in making women have long hair and owning slaves (note that these examples are from the New Testament).  When a Christian knows at a deep level that something is wrong, even the Bible can't change his mind.  I think that if we make Christians confront the truth that their beliefs consign good people to eternal hell, it can change their mind more than any argument based on Bible contradictions.  That's another reason I don't spend much time trying to disprove the Bible.  It's easy to show that the Bible contradicts itself, doesn't agree with modern science, and isn't supported by archeology.  But that alone isn't enough to show that the Bible is immoral.  To do that we need to make philosophical arguments, and that's what I propose here.

 

When I was still a Chrisitan, during one of my more 'optimistic' periods, I ventured onto the Richard Dawkins's atheist forum- this would be about 4 years ago (it got took down after this).  Boy were there some nasty people on there, who only served to strengthen my faith- as Bhim pointed out. They hindered my journey to find the truth.   

 

The main thing that enabled me to start distancing myself from Christianity and the people (Christians) who exerted their influence over me, was my utter rejection of the hell doctrine.  I remember many a passionate conversation with various church members, regarding the evil doctrine of hell.  Only one person has ever agreed with me.  

 

 We have a local Christian book shop in our town.  It's also a cafe, and so I made friends with one of the volunteers there.  I remember trying to discuss hell with her.  I just couldn't get through to her, how evil this teaching was.  Eventually she asked me not to mention it again, as it made her feel churned up.  I know why she felt like this, but she isn't ready to face why.  So, I didn't mention it again.  No, I wouldn't mock Christians personally.  They don't know they're so deceived.

 

Interesting.  It looks like in the end, you and I had the same problem with Christianity.  Like you say, this doctrine is evil.  I think that an reasonable person's conscience dictates that God ought not to send a person to hell for refusing to convert to Christianity and believe in a specific doctrine about Jesus.

 

And to any Christians reading, yes I deliberately used the word "ought," knowing full well that moral law necessitates a moral law-giver.  No one ever said that law-giver has to be Jesus, the very man who is eager to cast us into hell.

[Vigile]

  When a Christian knows at a deep level that something is wrong, even the Bible can't change his mind.

 

I think you need to be careful assuming too much from this.  Christians do adjust their theology, but it happens slow and only when the world around them changes first, changing the paradigm in which they live.

 

For many centuries, xians supported slavery, but as society around them adjusted, xians eventually were dragged along, sometimes kicking and screaming, and roughly about 50 odd years behind their secular neighbors.

 

We'll see the same thing with gays I think.  Society is changing its mind, but xians, for the most part are still kicking and screaming.  At some point they'll deny they were ever against gay marriage and discrimination based on orientation. 

 

Note that they don't arrive at these positions through reason, but through a shift in public sentiment that surrounds them. 

 

That deep level you speak of is the general will of society (see Rousseau's social contract and treatise on general will). 

[mwc]

     Waaaah!  I'm Jesus.  I got killed earlier.  Boo-hoo.  Maybe I'll be back...maybe I won't.  Tune in tomorrow.

 

          mwc

[Vigile]

     Waaaah!  I'm Jesus.  I got killed earlier.  Boo-hoo.  Maybe I'll be back...maybe I won't.  Tune in tomorrow.

 

          mwc

 

Does this mean you took the mickey? I've been trying to figure out exactly what that is. 

[mwc]

 

     Waaaah!  I'm Jesus.  I got killed earlier.  Boo-hoo.  Maybe I'll be back...maybe I won't.  Tune in tomorrow.

 

          mwc

 

Does this mean you took the mickey? I've been trying to figure out exactly what that is. 

     I took the nails...on the cross.    The way I bitch about it you'd think I was the only one in history to do it too.  It's not so much the nails but those little splinters.  They hurt more than you think they would (wood!  Ha!  I'm dead and making puns).

 

          mwc

[Ravenstar]

Out of respect for people I wouldn't mock anyone's religion in front of them...randomly, unless they are being an asshole about it.

 

But parody, mockery and satire are great ways to take dumb ideas down a notch.  Since I don't believe in Yahweh or Jesus I see no reason to afford them (or the idea of them) respect or reverence... and humor is the perfect way to point out the ridiculous. Christianity is ridiculous.. so are other superstitious beliefs.

 

I frequently laugh at ridiculous ideas.. like creationism, for example, and people who think that angels or fairies are daily invisible companions who guide and protect them. Same difference.

 

Humor puts things in their proper perspective. 

[Lilith666]

I can understand how you feel. A lot of people, including me, find the biblical Jesus who loved kids, treated women respectfully, and did not observe racial boundaries very appealing--particularly given the social attitudes of his day. But the historical person may not be the same one who is depicted in the bible. Naturally, Xians and the disciples would want to show him in the best light possible instead of recording anything

imperfect about him. So I have doubts about Christ versus the real Jesus.

 

As Ravenstar said, mocking Jesus in front of Xians is rude. I would avoid that. But when they aren't around, I am going to joke about him as much as I want. Quitting Xianity allows people to let themselves go a little because they aren't divinely bound by love-thy-neighbor rules. Not to the point of being a jerk, but I do poke fun at religion now and then, and I don't

think there's anything wrong with that as long as it doesn't get obnoxious. Respect Jesus if you want. But remember that he is no more holy than Gandhi or Buddha, and that relaxing the be-nice laws a bit is OK and even healthy.

[mwc]

     Whew, I had some stuff to do like hang out in a garden, take a walk and eat some fish with some dudes but I'm all magically alive again somehow.  Yay for me! 

 

     I think if I spot my shadow I float up into the sky and there's at least 2000 more years of sinning.

 

          mwc