This myTake makes a flippant, uneducated comment about Christianity. If you want to make a flippant comment about Christianity, then you should do so in an educated manner. Educated critiques of Christianity actually exist; use them instead of making stupid, needless comments that do nothing but make you look stupid.
1. Christian mythology is really a technical term and does not mean what you think it means.
Mythology is a collection of traditional narratives. Christian mythology refers to the collection of traditional narratives associated with Christianity. Unfortunately, the popular sense of the word is a bastardization of what the word really means. In popular culture, the word means "a collection of false stories". The truth judgment is added negatively. If you read the other myTake, then you'd see that the author views the quote as "mythology" and makes a point that even though he believes the quote to be "mythology", the quote does have some truth in itself, and he considers the quote valid enough to make his point about politics.
There are some things wrong in this picture. First of all, the author is neither using the popular nor the technical definition. What he calls "mythology" is really "theology", but he believes that "theology" is foolish or false, so he uses the term "mythology" to inject his truth judgment. Second of all, the author seems to be reluctant to accept that Christianity can offer truth.
This is what he said:
While this refers to Christian mythology, this is something that applies to many things beyond morality, voting included.
The contrast in that remark highlights that the author does not want to find truth in Christianity, probably because he presumes that Christianity is false and therefore it cannot be true in any way, but nevertheless he finds that what C.S. Lewis says about Christianity has some grain of truth and can be applied to different topics.
Perhaps, the author's prejudice of Christianity stems from the fact that anything supernatural is false, and therefore the theology based on the supernatural must be false as well. However, I believe this belief grossly misunderstands what theology is really about. I interpret theology as not about deities or the supernatural, but about human interpretation and perception of the supernatural world, regardless of whether the supernatural actually exists. Even if the supernatural world is not distinctively different from the natural world, that still does not change how humans feel or behave. After all, Christianity and other religions are part of the humanities, and many subjects in the humanities study the various aspects of human nature.
2. Be aware that anybody can be a Christian.
Too many people assume that Christianity has one set of rules that you have to follow or one set of beliefs. In reality, there are many Christianities, and each Christianity has a unique history and theology. Christianity is a very evangelistic religion and has been adapted by many different societies. Each society takes Christianity and adapts it to fit the needs of the people. For example, Lutheranism, a branch of Christianity developed by Martin Luther, was not only a theological movement, but also a political one. Martin Luther was German, and so he found support among the German princes who wanted to break free from Rome's political power over the Germanic states.
I contend that one reason why people still believe in Christianity is that they do find truth in the religion, and that truth is entirely relevant to their experiences. To say that theology is just about the supernatural without any humanistic experience tells me that some people just don't give in the effort to understand why Christians make a confession of faith. Instead, they make their own biased assumptions about Christians rather than forming an educated opinion based on what they observe in Christian thought and behavior. I don't know about you, but I find that making biased assumptions about a group of people is counter-productive, harmful, and unempirical.
3. Study Christian theologies.
If you want to criticize something, then you have to know the subject and look for weaknesses. Believe me, there are plenty of weaknesses in each theological tradition of Christianity. Sometimes, a particular theological tradition just does not jibe with one's own experiences or educated interpretation of the Bible.
Although many Christians believe that the Bible ultimately comes from God in some way (key word is Biblical inspiration), the secular approach in finding the authorship of the written words or ideas is an ongoing research field. Scholarly questions about authorship of the Bible do not necessarily undermine the theological standpoints of Biblical inspiration. If a section of the Bible is written by Person X, then that still does not say anything about whether Person X is directly controlled by God to write it word for word (dictation) or inspired to write it using his/her own words (limited inspiration).
4. Study the history of Christianity.
Christianity is a very old religion. I believe that if more people were to study the history of Christianity, then they would appreciate how the religion impacts the world positively and negatively and why people believe. A long-lived religion must be able to adapt to the times. If the religion is irrelevant, then why does it matter anymore?
If you do all that, then you would take criticism to a whole new level. Stop being a troll; be a critic. And use proper, standard vocabulary. If you want to be a skillful communicator, then you should know how to avoid words that only you understand. Words that mislead or inject undue personal judgments into a neutral concept help no one.
How To Question Christianity In An Educated Manner
Post Opinion
33 Opinion
Like
Share
Follow
3 likes
What is your opinion?
See More
Most Helpful Opinions
Anonymous
(25-29)
+1 y
Why do you feel the need, I understand militant atheists like to combat religion and are in the mindset that religious people are complete sheltered dumbasses who need to be reformed to the ways of the world. Why is this necessary, why not just live your life and let christians live theirs. I know as a STRONG christian that ANYTHING you would say to me would mean absolutely NOTHING to me, so its super pointless
1.1K opinions shared on Religion & Spirituality topic.
Not sure if I agree with the intentions behind this post but I'm so glad someone is explaining the stuff that's being explained on here. I'm getting tired of people telling me what I believe and they don't even know that there is a difference between being catholic and just plain christian.
An insult is an insult and it's never okay to insult someone simply because you disagree. Taking cheap shots at someone is what an immature person would do, a mature person would just change the topic or simply walk away. So, whether it be a straight forward insult or a insult dressed up with the word "educated", it's an insult. Honestly, how educated can one be if they think the only way to a solve a disagreement is by using insults? Just saying. This is a crazy take and I think it's wrong and sends a bad message.
0
2 Reply
myTake Owner
+1 y
In response to the few complaints, the Content Manager has decided to keep it, but changed the title. I agree with the decision. The former title was misleading and offensive.
1K opinions shared on Religion & Spirituality topic.
4. b. Make sure to include in the history of non-Western denominations of Christianity. Did you know that Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria were once major centers of Middle Eastern Christianity? Have Christian history classes in the West ever discussed the Sabbath-keeping, Kosher-eating Christians of Ethiopia or the Aramaic-reading, marital arts-studying Christians of India pre-dating the British missionaries? When was the last time topics like China's Christian emperor (or the heretical "Heavenly Kingdom of Great Peace" that nearly toppled the final dynasty, the Great Qing Empire) and their implications that still reverberate today were mentioned in discussions?
5. Study the languages of the Holy Writ. In time, you'll be able to read & assess the verses right out of the text and catch translations issues that would usually be glossed-over by the translation-dependent.
Protestantism killed Christianity by conceding too much ground to the atheists. Metaphysically speaking they share the same premises, and thus atheism is just the inevitable next step. It would never survive a Scholastic worldview however. The teleological vision of Aristotle and Aquinas reigns supreme. This is evident in the way that virtually no atheist thinker has ever truly addressed Thomas Aquinas' proofs for God, but merely addresses a straw man based upon William Paley whose view of God was radically different. This would be understandable if it were only the laymen making the mistake--even Hitchens who is just a glorified journalist--but when qualified academics like Daniel Dennet are making the same mistake, that is when you know there is a problem. This ignorance is precisely why Anthony Flew was led to theism, not because of a 'new' argument or anything that the Protestant narrative could produce, but by a rediscovery of Aristotle and Aquinas.
Lol, yeah forget about all our scientific discoveries. Let's go back to ancient philosophy based on anecdotal evidence and brainstorming with no merit. "Uhhhhh, there has to be a first mover! It's God! It has to my God you dumb atheists! It's the one in the Bible, not the Quran or in Greek mythology but mine!" LOL! Groundbreaking stuff... like a thousand years ago. Who moved God again?
@Peskyn3gr0 Just what I said: a straw man based upon William Paley. Thomas Aquinas never said that everything which exists has a cause nor did his arguments rest upon the premise that the universe had a cause (even though it does). They merely rested upon the fact that causal relationships can and do exist at least to some extent within the world, even if the world itself did not have a cause. That was all he needed to get the ball rolling via metaphysical demonstration. Furthermore there was nothing about science that could not fit into a teleological worldview, though admittedly there would be less of an emphasis on it.
Hey, why don't you give me the objective, teleogical purpose of human beings... oh yeah! We can't! Because that was just nonsense put forth by greek philosophers at the height of scientific ignorance LOL Where are you reading this by the way? "Look atheists, there is a logical and rational explanation for the existence of God, except for the explanation of what created God because he's special and can escape all rationale and logic" LMAO
@Peskyn3gr0 I can't, but Thomas Aquinas and Aristotle can and did. You are resorting to a straw man yet again because I never claimed that everything that exists has a cause nor did Aquinas. Did you get that off of richarddawkins. net? Because it is not true. There is nothing about science that cannot fit into a teleological worldview. In fact, your statement about science burying the ancients is not a scientific statement in itself but a philosophical one. In other words, you are utilizing the same discipline that you are trying to attack.
@Peskyn3gr0 False. A triangle is still a triangle yet we hardly ever observe a truly triangular object in the real world. Only in mathematics. But this in no way means that triangularity does not exist; it merely means that most triangles do not meet the mark perfectly. Similarly, humanness still exists, but the vast majority of us fall short.
Yeah, but Christianity has the perfect answer right? There is no correct way to live your life, your existence is inherently meaningless, philosophers and theologians have been trying to tie this down forever, and all they have met are contradictions. It's like Plato's use of "forms" in his socratic dialogues, always trying to find an "objective meaning" to abstract concepts and utterly failing every time.
Don't they call it philosophy? You take the supernatural God out of theology and then you have philosophy. I'm a Christian and I go to church but I don't believe the supernatural stuff like Noah's ark and all that other bullshit. That stuff never happened they're just "mythology" that got passed down but I do believe Jesus was a real guy who said a lot of smart and good things that we should follow.
The problem with most other churches is that they are what we call "literalist" and they actually believe all the folk tales in the bible as "literally" true, the world being made in 6 days, parting the Red Sea, etc. Those people are just ignorant because they read the book but they don't get the message.
As far as christianities history? Yeah I wouldn't go there cause those Catholics were batshit crazy😄 I'm just glad they don't do that shit anymore.
0
18 Reply
myTake Owner
+1 y
Philosophy is a component of religion.
Separating "the supernatural stuff" from the "natural stuff" is a philosophical belief in the nature of God. The separation between supernatural and natural is both believed by Christians and atheists.
There are people who do not believe that there is a distinct separation.
Really? You think all those supernatural stuffs are mythologies 3 Let me ask do you believe in miracles? Have you seen supernatural things like healing and miracle happen right before your very eyes? Answer me and let's continue.
@MicDarlins I've never seen a miracle but I'm not gonna say I believe or not just because I think something miraculous happened. I think Jesus was a wise person and he is an example of what we should be. Loving, kind, forgiving, peaceful, all those things that good people have in common. Do I believe he rose from the dead? No. I'd rather know something like that instead of just taking someone's word for it. I don't even know if Jesus WAS a real guy, but even if he wasn't, the man named Jesus in the bible is still a good role model.
I go to a nondenominational church. I guess I should tell you that I'm a minority of one in my family and in our church, but we're still very open minded about stuff
Yes, but do you know the theological tradition? The denomination is a political body; the theological tradition is an interpretative method to read the Bible.
Sometimes, a non-denominational church can be in many different provinces. Can you share the Statement of Faith of your church or the organization that your church is affiliated with?
How the hell should I know? You think we have a history like the Catholics? Our tradition is coffee and dohnuts after church on first Sunday of the month.
Theological tradition is a technical term for a branch of Christianity with a characteristic set of beliefs. Lutheranism is a theological tradition. Lutheran Church Missouri Synod is a Lutheran denomination in the United States.
Do you know what Christian school the pastor got his theology degree from?
Many Christian pastors may have side jobs to feed themselves, as the church may be a non-profit organization. Do you know whether s/he has any theological training?
He died and indeed rose again on the third day. Israel bears record of the tomb, where he walked, where the last supper took place etc. I pray that the eyes of our understanding be enlightened
2K opinions shared on Religion & Spirituality topic.
Atheists are usually just dumbasses who think they know shit. Lol they're like edgy hipster teenagers. It's hilarious to watch them make their cliche, laughable points.
5
6 Reply
myTake Owner
+1 y
I disagree. However, I will upvote you, because you have given me an idea for a future myTake. My next myTake will be about the strong points of atheism.
I have to disagree with you on that. Atheists tend to know more about religion than religious people. I've yet to see a point from the religious side that proves the existence of a higher power. Without proof God is no different from Santa Claus.
@QuestionMan Are we talking run of the mill or academic? Because the former do not know shit, but atheists know slightly more. But I would argue that the academic religious types know more than the academic atheist types who tend to just parrot intellectually fashionable ideas from the Enlightenment even if they are untrue (hence Dawkins and anyone who uses the term 'Dark Ages').
@JRICHARDS1996 I was referring to the average person on both sides. When it comes to academics there are some decent apologists for religion but I feel like their arguments don't hold weight since they have the burden of proof and don't present any.
561 opinions shared on Religion & Spirituality topic.
Who cares? This take is a nice idea, but religion will never be without war. Not until it ceases to be opinion, and becomes concrete fact.
That's the entire problem. Religion, all religions, every single one, are nothing more than OPINIONS. Any thought or belief that cannot be confirmed with physical evidence is nothing more than an opinion. And that is a fact.
1
15 Reply
myTake Owner
+1 y
There are different kinds of evidence. Holding physical evidence as more believable than other types of evidence is empiricism. Anecdotal evidence is a narrative that is presumptively true based on a person's personal history. Adages about life are full of wisdom based on a collection of anecdotal evidence.
@myTake Owner I disagree physical evidence is stronger ie you can see my tree is taller than my house vs I don't have a photo to show you but kenny hear will back me up in telling you that my tree is taller than my house.
And for anecdotal evidence for that you need unbiased un cherry picked accounts ie if you asked a randomly picked neighbor is my tree taller than my house it would be more reliable than asking me if say the tree was between me and the window of an opposing house and I wanted planing permission to add a window in the loft or something.
@sedrftvgyhujik That's a bad example. In some situations, like the situation you mentioned, it's best to directly measure the house and the tree, or eyeball it. However, when you want to know your grandma's childhood, then you have to take her word for it. Personal feelings and recollections may be subjective, but they are meaningful and possibly even useful for future generations.
Videos and pictures of parts of her childhood may very well still be more accurate especially that far back and an anecdote from say her younger brother may paint a very different picture than one from her. For example if she says I never supported the war but there's a video of her jeering and throwing things at the men who refused to fight. The video would be stronger evidence than her anecdotes.
@sedrftvgyhujik Videos and pictures are modern. If you go back farther enough, the camera is limited to the wealthy before it democratizes to the common people. If your family has no pictures or videos, then you have to trust her word.
They tend to be more recent and clear cut like "the river has been really high this year and it breached the bank you reinforced for me" rather than "I want to a soothsayer back when we lived in... and they predicted... spot on" or even "I know i didn't ever win any awards but use to be the fastest bowler on my cricket team back in boarding school ".
@sedrftvgyhujik How about this? "Back in my day, we didn't have the luxury to eat meat on a regular basis. Meat was reserved for the wealthy or on special occasions. Consider yourself fortunate that meat is plentiful in these parts. I learned true suffering. Every day, I had to walk to school, and by the time I was 12, my parents couldn't afford me to school anymore. And because I was a girl, I had to work to feed my brothers and sisters."
Well agriculture and farming practices weren't nearly as advanced neverwhere distribution or preservation methods so just from that it would follow that more people went hungry there's also health records and pictures to back that up and i would hate to live back then by the way.
I do however know from family photos and records that luckily that wasn't the case for any of my grandparents.
My grandmother had dementia. I literally couldn't trust a single thing she said. She had 3 sons including my dad, and only 3 sons. She often introduced me as her daughter to visiting relatives that I am very close with.
Those men who wrote the Bible could easily have been just as senile, or even under the influence of psychedelics via toxins in the drinking water. Or maybe they were eating too many of the miracle Jesus fish and suffered mercury poisoning. It could happen.
551 opinions shared on Religion & Spirituality topic.
This holds true for everything not just criticism of christianity (which would be more accurate to call it such as an insult is meant to offend, a criticism is meant to point out flawes). Same can be applied to all ideologies too to be honest (even atheism).
0
2 Reply
myTake Owner
+1 y
Some people find pointing out flaws in an ideology offensive, because it's considered blasphemy. However, I think a healthy dose of criticism should be encouraged, not hidden.
But its not. I am specificly reffering to actual definition not perception. I would absolutely agree that criticism is healthy in fact its absolutely necessary if any one is to evolve or get better then what they currently are.
I think even you aren't truly educated on Christianity. Christianity existed 300to 500 years before constantinople and the European adoption. So the church existed before then it was just under raps since it was illegal and punishable by death to be a christian in the roman empire. different secots of christianity come from the European adoption the only true to pre european influence is evangelism which means to spread the world of christ,
0
1 Reply
myTake Owner
+1 y
Eh?
I never made the claim that I was educated on Christianity. The purpose of the myTake is to persuade people to criticize Christianity in an educated manner.
I don't insult Christians or people of any religion but I don't agree with Christianity. I've been in two Christian schools in my life for over 10 years. I also took a look at evidence against Christianity. I know so much about Christianity to prove them wrong but I won't burst their bubble.
@TheSpartan Personally, I find that naturalistic atheists and Christians just interpret the world differently. No amount of evidence will win over the other; it's based on faith/trust.
I believe you have been looking at what appears to be Christian but what you describe is not what the Bible calls a Christian. There is a difference in what the world calls a Christian and what the Bible defines as a Christian. There are things to look for in a Christian. Once you see the behavior, identifying one becomes easy.
@TheSpartan Not to be rude. You may very well be very level headed hard working and reasonable in other areas, but even if the atheists you argue with are all fools whenever i see arguments about religion they still prove the religious side wrong very quickly , usually multiple times? What does that say about your side of the "argument"?
4.5K opinions shared on Religion & Spirituality topic.
Knowing about your 'enemy' is key. That being said, I would really avoid religious 'debates' because it's usually just annoying people who like to 'debate' allll the time... argue. :/
Christianity is a very evangelistic religion and has been adapted by many different societies. Each society takes Christianity and adapts it to fit the needs of the people.
What do you think about this? Word of God doesn't change to fit needs of people
2
13 Reply
myTake Owner
+1 y
I never said that "word of God" would change. I said that the religion changes. Religion encompasses religious culture.
A lot of people think god said and believed in things that there are no mention of because of some churches. A church adds rules on top of Christianity and calls it their interpretation. Not everybody understands this so they assume all the rules that go with it are from the bible.
@Telekinetic-Potato but the bible itself has opinions and views of the people who copied it, and translation mistakes and of course i can't understand that another man has an authority from god to put rules
Well, even the bible you can't really take everything seriously. You have to keep in mind that new religions happened every time a new area was taken over (yea, so every couple of years) Many of the stories in the bible are mysteriously similar to stories that all other religions share.
Again to believe what you said would be following the guidance of one of the churches. I have my own interpretation on the bible and it's to say that a guy named Jesus was running around the world, performing magic like no one else saw before and all he wanted was for everyone to be good to each other. He wanted it so so bad that he let himself be nailed to a cross to bleed to death. Then he was put in a tomb that would be impossible for one person to get into and that tomb was empty when many people went there. He is the biggest evidence for God that I know of and I really think all I have to do to not regret my actions in this world is to follow the spirit of Jesus's good-doings.
@Telekinetic-Potato search in more religions , you may find something interesting But the idea of someone with authority from above the sky is not right to me I believe in Jesus but in different way
If you're talking about something along the lines of what I think you are. . . I can imagine. But there's actual historical proof that backs up some of the claims that are made. He's different because he was the ONLY person whose influence lasted for so long after his death. There were countless people who claimed to be god at this time but THIS was the man who stood the test of time. So he must have done SOMETHING that made his followers go crazy, tell it to a bunch of people, they saw how sincere the follower was and went "holy shit" and so on for long enough for a huge-ass church with power over everything to happen
@Telekinetic-Potato I don't believe that any man have a power from up there , and God can't be a crying helpless baby shitting himself I believe Jesus one of the best men ever walked on earth Mary is the best woman I hate when some Christians insult them
1K opinions shared on Religion & Spirituality topic.
How to question atheism: you can't. In fact you can't question no one who thinks that they have all the prove to say God doesn't exist, is like talking to a wall. We will never know the entire truth of our existence. What's clear for me is that someone created all life on earth and that Jesus was send by him to gives us an important message.
3.7K opinions shared on Religion & Spirituality topic.
I don't really see this myTake as necessary is it? I mean obviously if you're going to criticize something you need to understand it right? For example I couldn't criticize a BLT without knowing what a BLT is...
Who cares? This take is a nice idea, but religion will never be without war. Not until it ceases to be opinion, and becomes concrete fact.
That's the entire problem. Religion, all religions, every single one, are nothing more than OPINIONS. Any thought or belief that cannot be confirmed with physical evidence is nothing more than an opinion. And that is a fact.
@dragonfly6516 There are different kinds of evidence. Holding physical evidence as more believable than other types of evidence is empiricism. Anecdotal evidence is a narrative that is presumptively true based on a person's personal history. Adages about life are full of wisdom based on a collection of anecdotal evidence.
@dragonfly6516 and Asker is why I went Anon on this one, always a problem on the sore subject of politics and religion. I leave everything in in God's hands no matter on both subjects. Everyone has their own opinion.
Most Helpful Opinions