View Single Post
Old 03-03-2004, 01:14 PM   #47
ShadowTemplar
Heathen
 
ShadowTemplar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 1,068
Why do people dislike Christianity?

A question often asked on these boards, I feel that it's time to give my .02 on it:

The question in its full length is:

Why do people dislike Christianity more than e.g. Islam?

I think that the answer is that the people on these boards come mostly from countries with a long Christian history. Since these Christians have grown up on their 'home turf', so to speak, they have never had their beliefs challenged in any serious fashion during their childhood. Such lack of opposition means that they confuse fact and faith.

Z. B. some of the posters here have the bad habit of talking about Jesus's ressurection as though it was an actual, historical event. The actual historical events surrounding Jesus-called-Christ are vaguely documented at best. Mixing hard facts and personal interpretations is a bad habit. When this is pointed out, most of the people in question respond that 'that's what they believe'. Fine, but it's still an interpretation, and should be kept seperate from the supporting evidence.

By confusing faith and reality in their arguments, they seem to imply that their faith is true or that the facts are a matter of faith. Both of these implications are hugely offensive to the rational onlooker, because they discredit experiment and reason as the final arbitrators of conflict, and replace them with what is viewed from the outside as childish superstitions.

This effect is akin to the irritation felt when a hardline Marxist talks about a revolution somewhere in history as though it was part of the chain of events predicted by Marx, that would lead to Communism. The error here, of course, is that Marx' models are largely unproven, and thus cannot be used to present the historical facts of a given revolution. Marx' models must be considered seperately from the historical facts.

By contrast, a follower of some other religion (a Satanist, for example) will usually be much more skilled at debating properly (seperating facts and opinion, not losing control of her emotions, etc.), and more skilled in refuting the most common counter-arguments to her points, simply because she is in sharp training because she has had far more opportunities to swap views with someone she doesn't nessecarily agree with.

So where the followers of a religion have been raised on said religion's own turf, they come off as ignorant, brainwashed zealots compared to those who have been raised on foreign turf.

Of course these are general considerations. There is an astonishing variation within these norms.

Oh, and BTW I find that seperation between Church and State is a bad idea, because the Church cannot be effectively oppressed if it is independent. And if the Church is not oppressed, then the State is slave to the Church. There is no middle road.

ShadowTemplar is offline   you may: quote & reply,