You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!

Why I believe Christianity is immoral

In a previous thread I have argued that most Christians are immoral. I would like to develop this now and argue that the entire basis of the religion is itself immoral and wicked.

Before I start it is important to realise that I am talking about Christianity as in 'following Jesus'. I take a Christian to be someone who tries to live their life according to the teachings of the character from the New Testament - Jesus of Nazareth. It is also important to realise that I am not 'having a dig' at individual Christians. Fortunately, I think, most self-professed Christians actually don't follow the teachings of the bible character.

So, let me start by trying to establish what I believe Jesus teaches. I am NOT going to include the usual versions of the universal ethic (do unto thy neighbour....etc) because that particular ethic far pre-dates Christianity and is common to most religions before and since. There is nothing specifically Christian about the notion of treating others as you would like to be treated.

So what messages can we say are particularly Christian? I want to concentrate on four.

1. Jesus/God is the only one who can forgive sin.
2. A true follower should cast aside worldly considerations and follow Jesus.
3. Turn the other cheek to enemies/transgressors.
4. Thinking bad things is as bad as doing them (thought crime).

The biblical support for these is beyond dispute, and I leave it as an exercise for the reader to find the particular references.

So let's consider these individually.

1. I find the notion that anyone has the power to forgive a sin committed against me immoral. The notion that someone can injure me and then receive pardon, regardless of my wishes, is repugnant. To those who say that secular courts do the same thing, you are quite wrong. Secular courts act on behalf of society and do not forgive anything. A not guilty verdict is not forgiveness, and a person who serves a sentence in prison is not 'forgiven' for the original offence.

2. Jesus says repeatedly that a true believer should walk away from worldly responsibilities - such as family - and follow him. This is deeply immoral. All of us have people who are, to some greater or lesser extent, dependant on us. The idea that we should simply walk away and not worry about their well-being is obnoxious, yet this is the message that Jesus repeatedly preaches.

3. Forgiving enemies might seem like a noble and worthy goal but it is not. If someone strikes me, and I simply turn the other cheek, then how are they to learn that their behaviour is unacceptable? What is to stop them hitting someone else - especially since their experience teaches them that such behaviour carries no sanction? I am perfectly willing to forgive someone who has done me wrong, but I would first wish to see some evidence that they are genuinely sorry for the wrong.

4. The most repulsive part of the Christian doctrine is the notion of thought crime. God, we are told, is like the ultimate dictator. Not only does he see what you do, he sees what you think, and what you think will be counted as evidence on the day of judgement.
Even the God of the Old testament, Yaweh - selfish, sadistic, genocidal maniac that he is - does not condemn people for their thoughts, only their actions. It is the supposedly new improved, user-friendly version - Jesus - that introduces this repellent notion. Thus we read in Matthew:
Matthew wrote:
You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgement.' But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgement…
You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.' But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

The notion that people's thoughts are equal to their actions is profoundly and deeply immoral. One of the things that separates us from other animals is our ability to NOT act on our instincts and impulses. Thus I may look at a pretty girl and think 'cor....I'd like to.....' (I leave the rest for the reader to imagine - and I promise that I won't convict you of sexual thought crime). To say that this is on a par with actually raping the woman is actually evil. It denies my humanity on a basic level. It also means that, having thought something bad, I may as well go right ahead and actually do it - since there is no difference as far as God sees it.

So, in summary, I believe that Christianity, at the very core of the belief system, is immoral and wicked, and I am deeply thankful that most Christians are content to ignore much of the immoral twaddle that the character in the New testament insists upon.

And as for the 10 commandments as a rational basis for morality....don't make me laugh. In fact I'm not even going to waste my time with them. Instead I'll link a video which sums-up my opinion of them pretty well.

WARNING - this video contains strong language including the F word. If you think it might offend then DON'T WATCH

2 blog comments below

I don't know which "Christians" you are referring to.
mgeek on Mon May 07, 2012 4:17 pm
Hi! I find it amazing that you are able to write such a long post about this. I am a Christian myself by the way.

I don't really like debates especially regarding this topic. But I just want to comment on your first point, about Jesus/God being the only one who can forgive sin.

This might help just in case other readers don't know yet (As I was for 17 years):

As a former Catholic I was surprised to find out that Christianity is actually much different than Catholicism. You might've heard of this before, the main difference I found out is that Catholics believe that salvation comes from accepting Christ and doing good deeds while Christians believe that you only have to repent accept Christ into your life. (That's why He's called the savior)

I found out that Catholicism originated from the church during old testament in which there are priests where people confessed their sins to. And that priest was supposed to sacrifice an certain animal in exchange for their sins. But before doing so he must also sacrifice one for his sins - failing to do so would instantly kill him if he enters the holy place.

Now came the new testament in which Jesus was that priest in which He sacrifices Himself. Being a son of God, that sacrifice was so pleasing that it was able to forgive all the sins of everyone. It was God's gift - but the catch is, you have to repent, believe in it and receive it. And the new testament says that you can confess your [sins to God] only through Jesus. But somehow the old way of doing it (through priests) have stuck and that's the Catholic ritual we have today.

The main difference between Christians and Catholics is that Christians base everything on the Bible - without using any other doctrines. And since Catholics also call themselves Christians (because they too follow Christ), I think that's why there are a lot of confusion.

Anyway, about what you said
I find the notion that anyone has the power to forgive a sin committed against me immoral. The notion that someone can injure me and then receive pardon, regardless of my wishes, is repugnant.

Sin in the bible actually means offenses to God unless specified otherwise (i.e., he sinned to his brother). "Jesus is the only one who can forgive sin" is kind of misleading. It's more of "Jesus is pleading with God to forgive your sin[to God]". And even if God forgives that person, He is only forgiving the part that is offensive to Him, and cares little on what that person did to you and if you forgive him or not. Of course, if that person was a Christian, he should still be obliged to say sorry to you, but your choice to forgive him or not doesn't count in the "that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil."
lightwate on Sun Jun 03, 2012 8:33 pm

© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.