Is Science getting closer to God and the Bible?

[Ryan O'Dine]

Stating a religion's teachings is not promoting it, but stating that a religion's teachings are true is.

Simply citing that Jesus told us that the peacemakers are blessed is not promoting religion. Telling us that the peacemakers are in fact blessed is promoting Christianity.

Well, there's promotion and there's promotion. This was H3LL's post:

I disagree.

The teachings of christianity centre around promoting and funding christianity....Period.

Everything else is just a means to an end.

.

The question isn’t so much whether Christianity promotes itself, no matter that you mean "promote" as in “asserts itself to be true,” or (as I suspect H3LL meant), “pushes itself on others.” It’s whether any kind of promotion, together with the funding aspects, are the end-all and be-all of Christianity.

I think they aren't. I think the end-all be-all is in having a personal relationship with God essentially in order to get into heaven; and that this, at its core, is an ultimately me-centered goal.

 

[joobz]

I disagree.

The teachings of christianity centre around promoting and funding christianity....Period.

Everything else is just a means to an end.

.

It is my understanding that leading a good life (being kind, helping your fellow man, ...) was the proper way to being christian. I was never taught that you had to "spread the word" actually. rather, let your actions speak for themselves. But then, I never went on missions nor did my church actively work on the missionary front.

Definitely the church would like to see everyone as christian. But this isn't the 'end goal.' They believe that if eveyone is christian, the world would be more peaceful/wonderful. It's why you see a lot of christians inherently blame "others" for evils. Whether that "other" is a christian of another denomination, a muslim, a jew, an atheist. but that assumption of superiority seems to be inherent in any group defining quality (whether it is nationality, religion, athlete, music preference, school, educational dicipline...).

The only difference is religion has had the greatest success at getting people to commit horrific deeds.

 

[thaiboxerken]

A teaching story.

It's still just a story. Christianity is about promoting christianity first and foremost, then it's about charity, but only if you're the right type of person (Christian). Only since it has become secularized has it been more tolerant and accepting of those outside of it's religion, and even then, many christian churches still teach intolerance of certain people (homosexuals.)

 

[Ryan O'Dine]

It's still just a story. Christianity is about promoting christianity first and foremost, then it's about charity, but only if you're the right type of person (Christian). Only since it has become secularized has it been more tolerant and accepting of those outside of it's religion, and even then, many christian churches still teach intolerance of certain people (homosexuals.)

I’m really having trouble seeing Christianity being primarily about promoting Christianity. The church’s goal may well be to promote the religion. The preacher’s and pastor’s goal may be that. But I don’t agree it’s the goal of the practicing lay Christian.

I see the ultimate goal of the individual Christian as getting into heaven. Promoting the religion -- evangelizing -- is, at the level of the individual, just a means to that end.

ETA: And DOC's behavior attests to this. He doesn't care whether we believe him or not, only that God sees him evangelizing.

 

[thaiboxerken]

I’m really having trouble seeing Christianity being primarily about promoting Christianity.

I'm not. It's what's taught to christians by christians, to go out and convert people, spread the word, save people.. etc.

But I don’t agree it’s the goal of the practicing lay Christian.

The goal of practicing lay Christians seems to be to do whatever they want, have fun, and then use the "get out of hell free" card to gain salvation. I'm talking about the goal of Christianity, not christians.

I see the ultimate goal of the individual Christian as getting into heaven. Promoting the religion -- evangelizing -- is, at the level of the individual, just a means to that end.

I somewhat agree, but all it takes to get to heaven as a christian is to ask forgiveness and acceptance from Jesus and nothing else. That's not much of a goal since the means to get there is so easy.

ETA: And DOC's behavior attests to this. He doesn't care whether we believe him or not, only that God sees him evangelizing.

DOC's behavior suggests that he's here to actually convince/convert people and if we won't, then we're worthless people anyway.

 

[joobz]

I'm not. It's what's taught to christians by christians, to go out and convert people, spread the word, save people.. etc.

I can say that this is not universally true. Many christian groups could care less if others join. But these typically have an ethnicity attached to them. so, it's not like it's any better.

I somewhat agree, but all it takes to get to heaven as a christian is to ask forgiveness and acceptance from Jesus and nothing else. That's not much of a goal since the means to get there is so easy.

Well, you are supposed to MEAN it when you ask for forgiveness. Meaning you are supposed to feel remorse for your actions. Much like the way Voldemort could have repaired his split soul.

having true remorse isn't "easy".

DOC's behavior suggests that he's here to actually convince/convert people and if we won't, then we're worthless people anyway.

that's about the kindest way you could phrase it.

 

[Ryan O'Dine]

The goal of practicing lay Christians seems to be to do whatever they want, have fun, and then use the "get out of hell free" card to gain salvation. I'm talking about the goal of Christianity, not christians.

I have a cynical view of Christianity, but I think you outclass me here . In any event, it looks like we’re focusing on two different things -- individual Christians vs. Christianity. Since this is a DOC thread, I’m focused on individuals, but I take your point about Christianity as an organized movement.

DOC's behavior suggests that he's here to actually convince/convert people and if we won't, then we're worthless people anyway.

I’m going to strongly disagree. What evidence is there that DOC is “here to actually convince/convert people” as opposed to “evangelize for the benefit of his own soul”?

And with regard to your debate offer, I'm basically just a messenger of the facts. I'm not an expert on evolution or creation science. I mostly just put the facts out there, what you do with them is up to you. If you think a fact is not accurate, look it up, and tell us you found something different.

My bolding. What kind of person comes to a skeptics’ forum and refuses to debate? Is that the behavior of a person actually trying to convert? Or is it a person performing the empty motions of evangelism to score points for his own salvation?

I’m sure he’d be thrilled if he converted someone. But if he has no interest in talking to us at our level, of trying to understand us and facilitate communication, of even meeting us halfway where possible, then how can anyone claim he’s actually trying to convince anyone of anything?

DOC -- and every other evangelist I’ve seen around here -- exhibits the very essence of the me-centeredness I keep harping on.

 

[thaiboxerken]

I’m going to strongly disagree. What evidence is there that DOC is “here to actually convince/convert people” as opposed to “evangelize for the benefit of his own soul”?

Since evangelizing is the act of trying to convert people, I don't understand the question. DOC is here to convince people his beliefs are correct, and that act itself is evidence of trying to convert people. The reason he doesn't come up to our level of reasoning and rational debate is not because he's not interested in converting us, it's because he lacks the capacity. He's trying to convert us the only way he knows how, by flooding the forum with lies, deceit and misinformation.

 

[Cleon]

So does the brownie points you get for evangelizing beat the ones you lose for the whole "bearing false witness" bit?

 

[drkitten]

Since evangelizing is the act of trying to convert people, I don't understand the question.

Think of it as "going to a Greenpeace protest in order to get into that hot hippy chick's pants." You're protesting, but you're not really protesting. You don't care about Greenpeace, but wow, does she have nice legs....

DOC is here to convince people his beliefs are correct, and that act itself is evidence of trying to convert people.

That's the question. Is he really here to convince us, or is he just here for the Godly green stamps that he gets for going through the motions?

 

[drkitten]

So does the brownie points you get for evangelizing beat the ones you lose for the whole "bearing false witness" bit?

Oh, don't be silly. If God cared about "bearing false witness," he would have made a rule against it.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Think of it as "going to a Greenpeace protest in order to get into that hot hippy chick's pants." You're protesting, but you're not really protesting. You don't care about Greenpeace, but wow, does she have nice legs....

That doesn't mean he's not trying to convert people. He's evangelizing, whether or not his intent is sincere or not doesn't matter, he's still doing the act. He's still trying to convince/convert people to Christianity.

 

[Tanstaafl]

It matters in the context of this conversation, because his intent is exactly what people are trying to figure out.

 

[thaiboxerken]

I don't think it's possible to figure out his actual intent since asking him won't work because of his lack of honesty. We can only judge his actions objectively, his intent is just a guess.

 

[wahrheit]

The previous two posts

It matters in the context of this conversation, because his intent is exactly what people are trying to figure out.

I don't think it's possible to figure out his actual intent since asking him won't work because of his lack of honesty. We can only judge his actions objectively, his intent is just a guess.

are not far from describing the definition of an internet troll.

Uh, forget it. Seems I'm really Captain Obvious this week.

 

[Ryan O'Dine]

I don't think it's possible to figure out his actual intent since asking him won't work because of his lack of honesty. We can only judge his actions objectively, his intent is just a guess.

We're guessing at his intent, I agree. But we have two choices here. 1. DOC is honestly trying to convert us out of an altruistic desire to save our souls. 2. DOC is superficially trying to convert us out of a self-serving desire to save his own soul.

If you really believe #1 is more reflective of DOC’s behavior -- that his refusal to engage in a meaningful discussion, his lazy tactic of cutting and pasting from other people’s websites, his repeated use of authorities that have been soundly rejected by his audience, his repeated statements that he doesn’t care what we make of his arguments or authorities --

I mostly just put the facts out there, what you do with them is up to you.

I'm just putting info out there. What you do with it is your business.

and etc., then all I can say is... we're on very different pages.

 

[Hokulele]

DOC has specifically stated that he posts things for the lurkers. Why he thinks that people reading these threads will agree with his points after seeing every one of them systematically demolished is a bit beyond me.

 

[schlitt]

Christians who make no attempts to convert people are horrible people.
This sounds like quite a ludicrous statement at first, but I do believe it is true.
Here is why;

If you had knowledge about a planned torture and murder of your neighbor that was going to take place in a couple of hours, and your neighbor was unaware, would you be a horrible person if you did not care, and did not bother to tell them?
I think most would agree, yes, you would be a horrible person.

Christians believe they are in the situation of knowing an impending event.
The event they know is that everyone will suffer eternal torture.
The knowledge they believe they have, is how to avert this horrible event.
Not sharing their knowledge on how to avert this event is the same as the example above, if you do not tell your neighbor.

There are differences on how Christians believe they should go about converting people.
I was taught that living your life as a Christian, and showing kindness to people, would be the best way to convert people. Leading by example.
Other Christians believe they should go out and tell people pro-actively.
With the first example the logic is "God will take care of it, if you do your part", with the second example the onus is on the person to play a more pro-active part, un-assisted by god.

With the example of the neighbor’s impending doom, how much effort would you go to, to inform your neighbor?
Most people would drop everything they were doing and make it their number 1 priority to inform them.
For anyone who believes Christianity, conversion should be pretty high on their priority list.

DISCLAIMER: While I understand why people evangelize, I still find it extremely annoying

 

[Slimething]

Christians who make no attempts to convert people are horrible people.

Christians believe they are in the situation of knowing an impending event.
The event they know is that everyone will suffer eternal torture.

Good point. Conversely, these people worship a torturer so how does that make them good, or at least not horrible?

 

[schlitt]

Good point. Conversely, these people worship a torturer so how does that make them good, or at least not horrible?

I agree, this is one of the many inconsistencies Christians fail to see IMO.