u/Quiet_Defiance

Just saw a video of a religious woman scolding a young man with long hair to “change [his] sinful ways.” He said he doesn’t see a problem with long hair on men, but she just kept scolding.

It reminded me of how Jesus, in the Gospels, is a big fan of name-calling; he refers to the Jewish leaders as fools, blind guides, a brood of vipers, and children of the evil one.

In his convos with them, the vibe is very much, “I have knowledge and you are ignorant. I am right and you are wrong.” There are no attempts at teaching or persuasion. Just scolding, shaming, and name-calling.

Of course, this type of behavior does not change anyone’s mind. So why do Christians do it? Is it merely performative or what?

I was a kid in catechism class in the early ‘00s—around the time the gay marriage debate was heating up.

I remember being taught that marriage is just a choice, and that it has nothing to do with who you love (in an emotional sense). Throughout my teen years, I assumed I would eventually grow up and marry some guy I didn’t love, because that’s what I was told God wanted, and that’s what I thought everyone was doing.

Does anyone else remember being taught something similar? I didn’t realize how messed up it was until years later.

Inalienable human rights…Consent of the governed…Equality under the law…Freedom of speech…Religious tolerance…etc. etc.

Christianity (and especially Catholicism) has not come anywhere near close to offering the kind of peace and social harmony that living under the influence of these ideas has afforded us—except, perhaps, where certain strains of Christianity intersect with liberal thought.

Not only that, but Trad Caths benefit immensely from the liberal social politics that sprang from the Enlightenment. Freedom of speech means they are protected from government persecution for their faith. Religious freedom means they don’t have to fear other religious groups who might want to violently convert them. (That was the original intent of laws promoting religious tolerance in America—they weren’t written to protect atheists, but to stop Christian groups from fighting one another, as they tend to do.) Yet, ingrates that they are, they want to do away with these things because someone else might benefit from them.

Dumbest people alive, honestly.

Unlike a lot of people here, I left Christianity because I'm devoutly theistic and find Christianity's idea of the supreme being absurdly limiting.

Christians claim that God is immanent and transcendent, but neither of those claims are really compatible with their theology.

If God is absolutely immanent (i.e., corporeally present throughout creation), then the Incarnation means jack shit. And if God is absolutely transcendent, then he'd also transcend our efforts to confine him within creedal statements or holy texts.

The Christian god is, instead, what I like to call a "genie in a bottle deity," except that, instead of being confined to a magic lamp, he's confined within the Bible and church doctrine. That Christians don't grasp how trivially they treat the subject of the divine baffles me.

And do they not know that many other religions (due to doctrinal flexibility, pluralism, or both) don't have this problem?

When Jesus says all those variations of, ”Whoever loves anything/anyone more than me isn’t worthy of me,“ I‘ve always thought, “When did I imply that I wanted to be worthy of you, Jesus? Shouldn’t you worry about making yourself worthy of humanity’s worship? What have you done to earn my vote?”

The idea that leaders are neither entitled to the unconditional loyalty of the public nor exempt from moral audits is so foreign to Christianity that it’s scary. No wonder we ended up with Trump.

God of the OT:

*Incorporeal-yet-omnipresent; a somewhat decentralized source of divine authority.

*Is an asshole because he symbolizes the causal forces behind natural phenomena, and nature is mean.

*Doesn't want to conquer the world; is fine with letting other cultures practice their traditional religions (under certain conditions).

*Permits disillusionment or sustained skepticism from his followers (e.g., Lamentations, Ecclesiastes).

*Is willing to share the spotlight with human beings. (The OT devotes immense attention to the non-religious aspects of its characters' lives and culture.)

God of the NT:

*Strong central authority figure; a literal human monarch.

*Still a jerk, but has less of an excuse now that literary symbolism has mostly been replaced by doctrine.

*Aggressively imperialistic; wants to be the whole world's king.

*No room for skepticism. Believe, believe, believe.

*Nobody/nothing matters but him. (Ever notice how little we hear about the non-Jesus aspects of the NT characters' lives? It's all about Jesus, all the time! Nobody else has intrinsic worth.)

The verdict:

The New Testament is shittier in almost every way (ethically, artistically, and so on), and it's not even close.

All my life, praying to Jesus, thanking him for his sacrifice on the cross, etc., has felt like kissing up to a boss I can’t stand.

I get it—he did some nice things for the sick and disabled, and he’s against the rich. And he said things like, “Blessed are the peacemakers.” That’s great.

But the guy’s personality gives off such bad vibes, and I don’t really even know why. Is it because he’s always talking about himself? Is it because the entire NT feels like a sales gimmick? Idk.

I just feel crazy sometimes. Like, how does nobody else see it??

Sorry to sound like a nerd, but…I've always been annoyed at how John’s gospel refers to Jesus as the "Logos"—a term most prominently associated with ancient Stoic (Greek/Roman pagan) thought.

Unlike in Christianity, the Logos in Stoicism is a beautiful concept, IMO. For the Stoics, who were pan(en)theists, the Logos was the divine reason/form/order that governed the cosmos from within. It was understood that this divinity did NOT have private objectives (i.e., it did not have a desire to be worshiped, followed, or confessed as a king or savior). Instead, it was the deeply democratic spirit of the world's community as a whole.

So when a Stoic performs a civic duty, he's not obeying the commandments of a superior; instead, he does it because the indwelling social spirit of the community compels him. In other words, the Logos of the pagans was legislative and authoritative, but not authoritarian. It wasn't the "Me, Me, Me" kind of deity that we see in the Jesus of John's gospel, but a fundamentally communal concept: a collective "We."

I hate how Christians stole this radically egalitarian concept and erroneously applied it to their religion's strong central authority figure. Ugly. Ugly. Ugly.

I had a moment of clarity while reading a post on a Christian forum, where a guy was talking about how grateful he was for the gift of salvation in Jesus. I suddenly realized that despite all the years spent praying to Jesus, I’ve never felt that way.

Instead, what I feel is mostly resentment. I’m angry at the subjugation of women and gays. I’m angry at the imperialism, the genocides, and the destruction of indigenous cultures. I’m angry knowing that the Catholic Church is not truly sorry for any of it, because at the end of the day, at least they converted the heathens. I’m angry that Christianity is the religion the West is stuck with—because it was the biggest bully in the neighborhood and got rid of all the others.

And it’s not even a compelling religion. Its entire premise is that the universe revolves around one man’s messianic ambitions—as if I can’t turn on the TV at any time and see plenty of self-absorbed men who think all of humanity ought to worship them and accommodate itself to their political projects. I’m so tired of it.

NO KINGS!

I had a moment of clarity while reading a post on a Christian forum, where a guy was talking about how grateful he was for the gift of salvation in Jesus. I suddenly realized that despite all the years spent praying to Jesus, I’ve never felt that way!

Instead, what I feel is mostly resentment. I’m angry at the subjugation of women and gays. I’m angry at the imperialism, the genocides, and the destruction of indigenous cultures. I’m angry that this is the religion we’re all stuck with—because it was the biggest bully in the neighborhood and got rid of all the others.

And it’s not even a compelling religion. Its entire premise is that the universe revolves around one man’s messianic ambitions—as if I can’t turn on the TV at any time and see plenty of self-absorbed men who think all of humanity ought to worship them and accommodate itself to their political projects. I’m so, so, so tired of it. NO KINGS!