I can only have 10000 characters so I placed <> where quote info is missing, please read the paper and compare to my thoughts afterwards. Sorry for the inconvenience.
“The fact is it's the Christians <> gays,pro-abortion evolution, gay marriage”
It is not fact that Christians are always doing this. This is a stereotype that has been perceived by our culture because of radical believers. In a philosophical discussion universal statements and radical assumptions are very dangerous and creates many holes in argument. As a Christian, I don’t believe in war against gay marriage, I love people and nobody is perfect. This is what Christianity discusses. For many others, and me Christianity believes that Jesus was the Son of God. He illustrated this both by teachings and behavior. Jesus wouldn’t agree with waging wars on gays, pro-abortion, those that believe in evolution etc. I’m a neuroscientist and it would be very ignorant of me to not believe in evolution. Nonetheless, many people stop to question: Is science and evolution a work of God? Why not? If you study the two they fit more than perfectly. You can argue rhetorical meanings interpreted by mankind that the world was made in seven days, but how long is this reference to a day? History buffs know that a day use to have many meanings, being many lengths of time. Why can’t one day be a million years? This sort of pickiness is rather narrow-minded because it’s not excepting other cultural views and contexts.
“I interpret that to mean that they think <>political candidates who don't conform to their agenda.”
More assumptions with this paragraph. Is this persons interpretation right? Who is this they? All of Christianity or just the sore thumbs that stick out? As a Christian I don’t want Christianity to control the government. Why? It is very clear in many religious doctrines that people are not perfect. This is a main point of the gospel. Thus, they will never be able to act perfect or create a perfect society . This said, we need everybody working together to create happiness for our earth time. If Christians ruled the government (and this is coming from a Christian) we would head straight to hell (this is pun intended, not to be taken literally for wise guys out there
. This implies that I’m voting for McCain instead of Obama perhaps? Maybe I should call and revoke my donations then… apparently conservative republican is the only way Christians come. News to me.
“Christianity's roots <>acquire knowledge.”
Are we enlightened enough now to eradicate a belief in God? It’s rather boastful to assume that we are really “so much farther ahead”. If we are so intelligent as a race how come we can’t solve many of the problems the world faces today? To focus my argument for this bit I would like to address the issue of Science vs. God. A solid understanding of both suggests that the two can live simultaneously in the same world. I love science; it’s both hobby and profession. Nonetheless, I refuse to assume because we understand science better we should start disregarding God. If God is all powerful God would have thought of this before hand. I find it more logical that the creation of science was Gods way of creating things in a sensible way. Logical reasons for why things work the way they do seems like the way God would create things, instead of just random nonsense. Also, for the entire of fundamentalist out there, contact me for a more elaborate explanation of why evolution exists and my reasoning for God creating this concept. The world was not completely built in today’s perception of seven days. Period, end of story.
“To try to give the list the image <>Ten Commandments.”
The Ten Commandments is a work from the Old Testament. I keep hearing it thrown around and paired with Christianity. Although many parts of the bible are important, Christianity has one basic concept that sums up the entire gospel. God was saddened by the hate, anger, etc. taking place. Humans were abusing this gift of free will. Jesus Christ was sent and gave his life for our sins to create a bridge for us to get to have a relationship with God. Jesus pays the wrath of our sin so God can connect with us. I know for the atheists this is far’ fetched (I know, I was an atheist for eighteen years of my life!), but is it any more far’ fetched than saying science explains it all, when a bumble bee defies physics? Some fish swim faster than physics allows (based on muscle, density of water, etc.) Some paranormal activity can be explained by narrow thinking, but what about accounts that are unexplainable. You could suggest that we just haven’t learned enough about the world yet to explain these things, but then I could suggest that these things give us something to do during our time. Without thought, question, debate, mystery, etc. our life on earth would be boring wouldn’t it?
“Everything that we know about Jesus Christ is based strictly and entirely on hearsay.”
Everything we know is based on hearsay. Some hearsay is written down, so are the accounts of Jesus. There is more evidence that Jesus existed and performed these miracles as a work of God than there is for the existence of Julius Ceasar. I don’t think it’s appropriate to question one and not the other. I believe both existed and all I have is documented hearsay for both those believes. I also believe George Washington lived. The difference? Jesus claimed to be the Son of God and our savior, which scares people and creates more question for belief. Questioning is a great tactic that all should do, but it’s rather illogical how people will accept some things and not others when there is more “hearsay” if you will, about the latter.
“The first issue <>orbited the sun?”
This is simple. Why would that be important? If he was the Son of God I think there would be more important things to do than discuss science, this stuff could be figured out by mankind. Jesus had more important issues to discuss.
“Why didn't Jesus tell <> natural world.”
Again, if God was real and Jesus was the Son of God, these things wouldn’t be important at all. The human race lives within their own perspective so we place value on this type of information. I don’t see the importance in getting this information from Jesus when it can be learned on our own. If God is real (and for a few years now I believe God is real) and God came down and I got to choose “You want the inside scoop on how you were put here and what lies in eternity or you want the run down on AIDS and anorexia?” I would choose the latter. Asking for the latter would be comparative to a child dedicating their life to obtaining free candy bars. It could be good information, but is it the most important thing for discussion? The author continues on about Jesus not explaining science, but humans are dumb enough to figure science out (yes dumb enough, all humans can toot their horns, but for being considered the most accomplished organism on earth we are very stupid. This thought is relative to your frame of reference and idea of intelligence). Jesus came with a message that expanded farther than science, a different philosophical realm.
I’ll finish addressing each point and paragraph later, it’s getting very late for me. Before I end however, I would like to address a few different general arguments made throughout this paper. First, the time issue. Our time is created by us and relevant for us. To say God is judging at .57 seconds is ridiculous. God is not required to follow our patterns our use our concepts. If God is real, God created these concepts and to put it in lay mans terms, God probably has a few “cheat codes” for our little Sim City we live in.
Also, for believers and non-believers, it is strongly suggested that God chooses our judgment not humans. No Christian or non-Christian has the right to condemn anyone to heaven or hell. This is God’s job. There are outlines in the bible, but how do we know for sure we are interpreting these outlines correctly? With such diversity in culture and demograph it’s impossible to say that any single persons interpretation is truly correct, it’s all relative.
“One thing <> delusional then that's their prerogative.”
This (although I disagree) is what I agree with the author the most on. I say I disagree because I’m unsure of the author’s perception of propaganda and brainwashing. Nonetheless, I totally respect that there are many Christians that brainwash and use propaganda to “sell” Christianity. I believe in finding meaning yourself, but I also agree with elders giving guidance, it’s how we’ve evolved and gained knowledge. If everyone was given a fresh start on everything there would be no progress during or stay on earth. I also find it unsettling that the author has to use extremes and insults to get his/her opinion across. Such as “if they want to become delusional.” Is a different philosophical view delusional? The universal statements (so dangerous, please never use universal statements, always include exceptions and talk from more than just your view point, take other cultures and views into consideration. Research, research, research!)
I respect everybody’s views and I would never tell anybody they were going to hell. Whether you believe in God or not, I will consider what anyone else believes and any question they have towards my beliefs. I feel that this paper fails to do the same. Also, I love all people, yes all people. We all have faults and failures and it’s so easy to cover up our own messes by pointing at others. This mentality isn’t progressive.