h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

This entry, I suspect was specifically desgined to generate hot debate. I must say, some of this debate I find to be very entertaining. Though I am reminded of a hamster running in its wheel: for all its effort, it never gets anywhere.

Being neither Christian (though I am ex-christian) or Anti-Christian, I love participating in such debates since I can point out bullshit on both sides of the fence without harming my own position.

I think both sides of the debate rest on false premises:

Christians:
1: "The Bible and Christianity are true and meant for everyone."
Anti-Christian corolary:
1: "The Bible and Christian beleif need to be disproved for my beliefs to be valid."

The way I see it, the Old Testament or Hebrew Bible is a record of one specific God dealing with his one specific people. This God is not my god, nor am I counted as one of his people, so therefore, it does not apply to me. Since it does not apply to me, I do not have to worry about it. I do not have to prove its truthfullness, nor do I have to show its fallacies. IT DOES NOT APPLY TO ME.

The New Testament again is aimed at ONE very specific group of people: CHRISTIANS. I am not a christian, and so the New Testament does not apply to me. Since it does not apply to me, I have to spend no time in disproving it in whole or in part.

When my own beliefs are not in accordance with what is spelled out in these tomes, its no big deal. The trouble starts when folk just ***KNOW*** they have it right, and need to convince everyone else to subscribe to their point of view. Ofcourse, I am doing that very thing right here, right now. Though I do not have much invested in the hope that everyone will agree with me, it is my hope that I presented a less-seen viewpoint, and that it will stimulate thought, instead of "Bumper-Sticker Theology".

-- ZenMondo

You have the anti-Christian corrolary backwards: the Bible was disproven first. And I don't really use this stuff as a validation of my beliefs. My beliefs aren't really represented in this article, but they are in the one titled 'Atheism.' You'll notice that that one is quite lightheated in tone, as I don't take my own beliefs too seriously, and don't want anyone else to do so by mistake. I just see Christianity as something horrible, so I want to shake those beliefs. But I have no problem with someone who embraces, say, Zen Buddhism, because I've never heard of them whipping themselves into a frenzy and burning books and people.

It has sparked what is probably the longest and most esoteric debate forum on this site, which I've used for entertainment value, for enlightenment, and as a way to stay honest in the article.

I think you'll find that most non-Christians don't profess to *know* anything, apart from the fact that Christianity is crap.

You are my HERO. I read your whole antiXtion paper. I love it. Anything I can do to back you up I am there.

*blushes furiously*

Thanks, dude. It's nice to receive a bit of positive support.

I try to avoid all forms of organized religion--I'm not against it, I just don't see the point. My best friends are devout Christians--I just excuse myself and leave the room when the talk turns to religion.
--Baker

I coulde never hold friends like that.

Alex v2.5

With the topic of religion, I seem to come accross points of view that are either strongly for, or strongly against one particular belief system or another. Very few are willing to objectively consider a given belief system at it's fundamentals; stipping away all the political, socio-environmento-economic hoopla that has been piled into all belief systems over many centuries and through various evolutions in thought and value systems. Quite fascinating really...

It's very difficult to view Christianity in a neutral viewpoint. You either believe it, or you don't. If you believe it, chances are you think it's a wonderful thing, that it gives morality to people and helps people deal with life and stuff. If you don't, chances are you're going to get fed up with the proselytizing sooner or later, what with Jehovah's Witnesses knocking on your door, lame commercials on tv, and the political activism of certain right-wing fundamentalists. I have very strong anti-Christian leanings personally, but in my studies of it, I've tried to be objective, and I think that's why I uncovered all this stuff. When you look into it with an inquiring mind and an objective outlook, it stops making any sense.

Believe it or don't GargleBlaster, but I do indeed have a neutral viewpoint when it comes to Christianity. I think this may be because I am a recovered Zealot myself. I have a slight advantage over those who try to proselytize in my direction, being that I probably know my shit better than they do. I even got the nuances of the major sects down. For when I was towing the Fundementalist line, I had to know just what others beleived, and *why* they where wrong! (At the time my favorite hobby was converting those trying to convert me.) So, at this point most of the Christians I know realize that they are not able to tell me *anything* I do not already know, have considered, and perhaps rejected.

I understand the tenets of Christianity, the differences between the different denominations, and the pseudo-christian off-shoot paths as well. Many are valid paths, not for me, but valid for many of those walking it.

My rule is that I give the beleifs of others the same respect that I would like mine to recieve. It is possible to respect someone's beleifs without accepting them.

-- ZenMondo

The question of whether I believe one (religious) belief system or another is not as important as whether I understand why people choose to believe it. In this instance, the motivation of people to be drawn to a given belief system is important (to me anyway). To fully understand this, one must effectively (in a metaphorical sense) be put into the shoes of the "average" follower, and this, for most of us inclusing myself, is very difficult especially when considering the differences in lifestyle, education family/social life between myself and say your average muslim, hindu or buddhist.

Christianity, especially that taught by the more widespread churches is a different animal. The fundamental approach given by the churches is to rely on faith (often blind) rather then understanding. And it is with this approach that I have a problem.

Ok then, blush some more, GB, for here's my tribute to you!

There's one thing that I miss in this whole article, though: Xtians may *believe* that the Jews killed Christ, but in fact Rome did (the same Rome that is now the Capitol of Xtianity) by the hand of Pontius Pilate, who then washed his hands in innocense (insence in a sense ) claiming that he had their support.

That support was rather meager too, seeing as the reply to his question "Shall I crucify your King?" could also have been interpreted as "You are the King that should be crucified then."

The Pope nowadays is in fact a disciple, in that he is sworn to fulfill the duties that were once those of one of them.

Rather bizarre and ironic, if you ask my opinion. But then again, that's what Xtianity seems to propagate all around.

I need to reply to that first post, and shall do so shortly.

TRiG.