genuine question from atheist - view on Christanity and personal responsibility

[kentishgirl]

Hi - promise this isn't just Christian-baiting.

I've come to the conclusion that Christianity is a substitute for having a personal conscience or taking personal responsibility. Being a Christian is like having a 'get out of jail free card' in that you are taught God will forgive you anything. So you can do anything, as bad as you like, go and pray for forgiveness and move on, slate wiped clean, feeling great about yourself. So it doesn't matter if you do wrong. As an atheist, if I do something wrong, it's always with me, it's always on my conscience, so that makes me always try to do the right thing.
I didn't always think this way. It's the only way I can make any sense of something that happened to me at the hands of a couple of serious, committed Christians. One of them even works full time for a church. They did something terrible to me but have shown no remorse, no guilt, and made no attempt to make things right with me. I'm positive they prayed for guidance at the time and then forgiveness afterwards, and now all's good in their world, while I'm still dealing with the fall-out.
Am I really wrong in interpreting Christianity in this way? Isn't it true that it enables horrible behaviour by teaching you that if you do wrong, all you've got to do is pray for forgiveness afterwards, and you are ok, never mind the effect of what you did? Basically if God is your only judge, and forgiveness is guaranteed, it gives you permission to act like a right bastard as long as you say sorry to God afterwards? there's no personal responsibility for what you have done.

Watch it Dorrit, it's fab. John Hurt is in it...

Headinhands

Personally I am glad genocide is not ok, because to target a group based on their race or colour, for example, is not acceptable for us to do.

Strange how that people who object to 'objective morals' are quick to be morally indignant over God's judgement over sin and are quick to find fault with the “vindictive, bloodthirsty, ethnic cleanser.”

The conquest was neither ethnic cleansing nor genocide. God cared nothing about skin color or national origin. Foreigners (called aliens back then) shared the same legal rights in the commonwealth as Jews (Lev. 19:34, Lev. 24:22, Deut. 10:18)

God cared only about their sin.

Don't forget, when people turned their back on God and worshipped idols they didn't do it by half measures; they also turned to all manner of devious behaviour, such as sexual abuse and sacrificing children to their false gods. God has a right to judge, we don't in the same way.

Many balk, though, at the suggestion that non- combatants—women and children—were among the victims. This is partly because they assume the conquest was primarily a military action— combat. It was not. It was principally a sentence of judgment, with the punishment carried out by Israel’s army against the entire Canaanite people.

Characteristically, God deals not just with individuals, but with nations as a whole when grand designs are in play. Since Canaanite sin was regular and systematic—the entire adult population participated in the idolatrous system—God judged the entire nation.

Judgement, not genocide.

BigDorrit
If you feel put on the spot that's possibly because you're seeing there is no consistent answer you can give without feeling like your criticism has holes in it when it is held under he spotlight. I'm sorry you feel the need to refuse to answer a simple question, but that's your prerogative. However if you won't discuss it further then doesn't it seem a little unfair to happily demean alternative viewpoints to your own, and then demand answers when you're not prepared to give any of your own back!

Sacrificing children

A bit of a bum note for god to slaughter a nation for practicing something he expected Abraham to do. Why the hell would god even pretend to want Abraham to do something that god gets pissed off about?

god cared only about their sin

And babies and small children sin? And watching your entire family stabbed to death is the best way to deal with sin how?

I reject the notion of sin. I do things that aren't the best decision sometimes but it's not sin. We all do things that aren't the ideal from time to time. Do you think you should be thrust through? I don't.

head to sin is to do something against God's will. We all are fallible and all can sin. As you say, we all make decisions which are not ideal, we all make mistakes. I believe it is a mistake to do something against God's will and everything not done in Faith is sin. However your sins are forgiven if you believe on Christ.

When Christians talk about sin, please don't be offended, we also believe we all fall short of God's glory and in forgiveness. Who doesn't make mistakes?

It is understandable that you reject sin, you say you do not believe in God, without God, there is no concept no God's will.

No headinhands, I believe babies are not able to make choices for good or evil until they are more grown up. Until then, they are innocent and I believe are taken straight to heaven if they die.

Part of that innocence is being caught up in other people's poor choices. It's a very awful part of the circle of life.

Headinhands - if you reject the notion of sin, what do you call serial killers, or rapists and child molesters: victims themselves? Or people who are "doing things that aren't ideal some of the time" as you put it?

To be very honest Contemplates I see the people who have committed terrible acts as victims, they are deceived, or are not able to think correctly, or able to control their behaviour, as well as being sinners.

Of course they can be forgiven, but without sure and full repentance for what they have done, they remain dangerous.

BigDorrit human morality is not consistent between people or societies though. Psychologists are beginning to argue there is no free will. This is backed up by certain patterns in brain physiology being connected to predispositions in behaviour.

It is the belief that I am free in Christ that saves me from this belief (of no free will), which gives me Hope. No free will is a depressing thought.

Thankfully brain plasticity and the metastability of gene expression also leads me to think we do not have to be the victims to our physiology, we are more than the sum of our parts. Deciding on the right environmental factors to produce positive results though, is mind boggling without a belief system....

BigDorrit I'm always amazed at the sheer diversity between cultures though.

The Pirahã people 's language has no narrative or recursion, something which linguists thought as defining aspects of language. Animals have complex communication systems which could be defined as language, if these features were not definitive of language.

It is perhaps the Pirahã's cultural belief system, which denotes anything outside if the present, immediate experience, as Taboo, which has affected them.

This is very pertinent since scientists have connected differences in language ability with differences brain physiology. In this way Pirahã belief may well have affected their physiology.

If physiology also affects behaviour, I can see why psychologists would argue against free will. But if it is belief affecting physiology, in the first place, you must see why people, such as myself, assign importance to beliefs.

^ this, entanglement, between nature and nurture, as being causal in behaviour patterns, for me encapsulates the 'free in Christ' or 'slave to sin' choice outlined in the New Testament. As outside of Him we cannot rely n our 'flesh' to cause us to do the right thing.

Although we all have very different starting points, strengths and weaknesses, so cannot judge between people.

What is the 'greater knowledge' though BigDorrit, when you come across ideas that conflict? Are the most popular ideas always the best? What about mob rule?

Not difficult to say BigDorrit, but may be difficult to live. I always have questioned how seemingly quite ordinary people can be capable of extremely terrible acts and visa versa. There is not enough knowledge in this world to find a satisfactory answer.

I was not happy attempting to find meaning in the world, without the positive direction, pursuing my Christian beliefs have allowed me.

And I want to be happy. Otherwise I can quite easily torture myself with over analysis. I would be forever restless...

I just don't think greater knowledge is necessarily making people happier. Knowledge does not prevent people from outpourings of grief either. Intelligence does not necessarily make someone a better person.

I like to think I can be humble enough to recognise my own fallibility and forgive fallibility in others.

BigDorrit I believe it is also more of a temptation for an intelligent, knowledgable person to become power hungry.

Knowledge is power and power corrupts.... .