What non-Christians think about Christianity

[Lucy107]

One more thing –

1. Learn what Christianity truly is from the Master himself; Jesus Christ who lived the example; To love God, Love your neighbor as yourself and love your enemies.

All non-Christians and Christians alike have failed true Christianity from choice number four above. To which Christianity is falsely judged of her members by non-Christians.

When True Christianity’s True foundation is built from Love and sacrifice.
Are non-Christians really honest with their view of Christianity for what all Christians have failed at in their humanity as non-Christians have?

One of the main things that Christianity and Christians in general are known for is the doctrine of eternal damnation.

Many non-Christians take issue with it, believing that it is immoral and unjust to punish people infinitely for a finite crime; that a loving God would not do such a thing to His children.

Futher, there appears to be a logical inconsistency: If “(eternal) hell” is defined as ‘eternal separation from God’, and if God is the Creator, Maintainer, and Controller of the Universe, and if nothing can happen without His will – then how can there be a place where God is not present, and where things happen that he doesn’t have or take control over?

Many people take issue with the doctrine of eternal damnation, and because of that, they take issue with people who hold it (notably, Christians). Because, at least from the humanist perspective, someone who believes that it is moral and just to exact infinite punishment for finite crimes, is not a good person, no matter what they may otherwise do.

 

[Randy_Carson]

This is a pretty good example of a Christian not listening to a non-Christian and trying to dictate a context entire of his own - I wonder what sales strategy is being used here?

This is a pretty good example of moving the goal posts when it is demonstrated that someone has done EXACTLY what was previously called for.

 

[schaeffer]

This is a pretty good example of a Christian not listening to a non-Christian and trying to dictate a context entire of his own - I wonder what sales strategy is being used here?

That’s what’s so nice about this study (as opposed to the post you reference) is that it’s basically “We’d like to hear what you have to say. We value your response enough to give you ice cream!”

and not “We want to hear what you say so we can tell you how wrong you are!”

 

[schaeffer]

I can definitely place myself among the responders to the study.

I have a mostly neutral to positive view on people who self identify as Christians AND are part of an active Christian community.

People who self identify as Christian but don’t do more than post “Repost this if you’re not ashamed of Jesus” on FB, I tend to have less respect for. Because other than them reposting stuff on FB…not much sign that Christ is a factor in their lives.

In my own experience (and your mileage may vary) Folks who say they are spiritual Christians but not religious Christians don’t seem transformed in the way many who participate in Christian communities do.

My feelings about Christianity as a faith, based on what I understand to be it’s most basic/common beliefs…

I think it’s teachings and morality are a good thing. I think that some of the stories are mythology or metaphor…but I find that to be a part of nearly all religions and not necessarily a bad thing. It’s what people do.

I feel some branches of Christianity have jumped the shark as far as beliefs and practices and I find the things they believe and do to be bizarre. But there are people who “go there” in every religion I’ve ever heard of.

I was surprised how many people in the survey said they thought Christ is the son of God (and say they believe in God) yet remain non Christian. If you believe it…why wouldn’t you consider yourself Christian?

 

[Mystophilus]

How can a non-Christian think about Christianity if a non-Christian does not know what Christianity is from a non-Christian view?

I presume that the last “non-” was accidental, because the sentence does not make sense as is.

Would not the view or thought from a non-Christian be a misconceived judgment of Christianity by actions perceived by human beings (sinners) who are Christian?

Er, not so much: a religion exists in its theoretical form, in its believed form, and in its practised form. An educated non-Christian can read the first and observe the last. The second is the only one which is not externally observable, and that is also true “within” Christianity: you cannot see what I believe.

Thus, a non-Christian can form reasonable judgements about Christianity as an ideological system and about Christianity as a practised culture.

1. Learn what Christianity truly is from the Master himself; Jesus Christ who lived the example; To love God, Love your neighbor as yourself and love your enemies.

All non-Christians and Christians alike have failed true Christianity from choice number four above. To which Christianity is falsely judged of her members by non-Christians.

While I agree completely that Ideal Christianity is in danger of being misjudged by Christian and non-Christian alike, my interest here is in non-Christian views of Christianity as it is really practised.

 

[Mystophilus]

My non-Christian religious view of Christianity is that it’s ‘mainly harmless’ to its adherents.

Thank you for the Douglas Adams quote.

 

[Mystophilus]

I was surprised how many people in the survey said they thought Christ is the son of God (and say they believe in God) yet remain non Christian. If you believe it…why wouldn’t you consider yourself Christian?

Thank you for your response.

There are quite a few people these days who self-identify in fashions which separate them from what they perceive to be the errors of religion, especially of organised religion. In the UK, for example, the vast majority of people who self-identify as Anglican do not go to church, in some cases because they find church irrelevant and in others because they find it objectionable.

There is also the issue of “counter-identification”, wherein person A says, “I believe in [Jesus], and so I am a [Christian]”, but person B says, “You don’t believe in [the absolute truth of the Bible / the authority of the Church / a literal, six-day Creation], and so you are not a [Christian].” The square brackets are there because you can swap elements out for other religions. In some cases, person B takes that to heart, and no longer identifies as Christian.

 

[Mystophilus]

First of all, I don’t speak for all. Secondly I mean no offense but here goes.
In life there are things that are impossible to understand and others that could cause despair. Where I see myself as a powerless speck on a rock hurling through the intricate ballad of space who will one day die, a Christian sees God’s handiwork, a plan, and a path that adds meaning and reasons for everything. If one’s Christian beliefs leads them to be a better person and cope with mortality and the lack of control we personally lack over the universe, then continue believing.

Thank you for your response.

 

[Mystophilus]

Thank you for your response.

 

[Mystophilus]

So, my statement that the study was about finding better ways of selling the religion cannot be taken to imply that I consider that the study was a good thing in and of itself.

I agree not only with the logic above but that the study was produced as a market survey. Its interest for me was the fact that it was an easily accessible survey of some non-Christians’ responses, and thus a prompt to justify asking people what they think: my survey is about the information, not the marketing.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Mystophilus;12785681]I presume that the last “non-” was accidental, because the sentence does not make sense as is.

That’s because I placed it in a form of a question not a sentence.

How can a non-Christian think about Christianity if a non-Christian does not know what Christianity is from a non-Christian view?

Other posters qualified my question, why can’t you?

Er, not so much: a religion exists in its theoretical form, in its believed form, and in its practised form. **An educated non-Christian **can read the first and observe the last. The second is the only one which is not externally observable, and that is also true “within” Christianity: you cannot see what I believe.

I believe CA’s has a forum for philosophy. I take it your OP is only addressing the"educated non-Christians"? Sorry for my posts and for participating in your discussion.

Peace be with you

 

[Mystophilus]

That’s because I placed it in a form of a question not a sentence.

Er, a question is a sentence so long as it has a subject and a finite verb. They are not exclusive sets.

Your original sentence was “How can a non-Christian think about Christianity if a non-Christian does not know what Christianity is from a non-Christian view?” Since a non-Christian necessarily has a non-Christian view, the final phrase is at least redundant as it is expressed, and thus my supposition was that it was a typographical error for “from a Christian view”. I apologize for the offence which you seem to have taken at this.

Other posters qualified my question, why can’t you?

I’m sorry, but I do not understand what you mean by “qualify” here: you seem to be asking me to limit the scope of your question, but you have already objected to my supposition regarding it.

I believe CA’s has a forum for philosophy. I take it your OP is only addressing the"educated non-Christians"?

Not at all: you asked whether a non-Christian’s view would not be inaccurate; I replied that an educated non-Christian’s view need not be so as far as Christian theory and Christian practice were concerned.

Sorry for my posts and for participating in your discussion.

Peace be with you

My apologies, once more.

 

[Moses613]

“Christianity” is too broad a category to respond to. The only thing I can think of that binds all Christians is the belief that the New Testament has some good stuff in it. Even the most basic questions of the divinity of Jesus are contended by various denominations (e.g. nontrinitarians). So I would say there are some versions of Christianity that tend to encourage their adherents to be good and moral people, that’s a good thing, some are evil, some are just plain wacky. I respectfully disagree with all of them.