Posted by: rudyruddell | June 14, 2015

Response to Byron Williams Column on the Decline of Christianity

In response to:
I think it would be more accurate to use the plural, “public faces of Christianity” rather than the singular, public face of Christianity. Christianity has over 41,000 denominations worldwide. (http://christianity.about.com/od/denominations/p/christiantoday.htm)
Such diversity can be attributed to the many ways in which the scriptures may be interpreted, hence Christians were able to be on both sides of many issues throughout history as you mentioned. Fortunately, Pope Francis, the largest face of Christianity, has come down on the side of love and unity rather than hatred and division. The problem is that there are many biblical verses that can support hatred of LGBT; for example, Romans 1:26ā€“27, 1 Corinthians 6:9ā€“10, and 1 Timothy 1:9ā€“10. How Christians grapple with contradictions such as these are part of the explanation for the diversity of denominations.
As for me, I prefer to think of Jesus Christ as one of many philosophers who advocate for love. Since the Bible is so conflicted, why not just stick with humanitarianism, which focuses on love for all humanity without being tied to ancient scriptures?
Advertisements

Responses

  1. After much rumination, I liken the plethora of divided and varied xian sects to popularity cliques, great if you’re an extrovert as there’s such a wide variety of religious/cult/tribe ideology to choose from.

    I find too many similarities between any meeting where ideology is discussed, even if I agree with what is being discussed at these local meetings, I find myself reliving all the trauma I experienced as a forced religious penitent while having no counterbalance discussion available to me as an impressionable child.

    All I had shoved down my mental pie-hole was “belief in god= good & non-conformity (atheist)=bad”.

    As far as people using their pet religious label as carte blanche to discriminate against their imagined or assumed “enemies”, people will use any societal construct to justify marginalizing, ostracizing or outright eliminating any potential ideological critic by amplifying emotionally volatile pejoratives to polarize intolerant “multipliers” using societal frames to normalize naked bigotry.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: