Christian response to what everyone else thinks we believe

While browsing the internet, I came across this demotivational poster, and decided I would respond to it.  It can originally be found here.

An Atheist Demotivational Poster

I want to respond, not as a method for Christians in apologetics, but simply as some thoughts to put on your noggins.  I should note that I can’t reverse the numbering, so just imagine this is really just a count down from 10 to 1.

  1. We deny other gods because our scripture says there is only one God, that is the Judeo-Christian God.  Other religions, with the exception of Buddhism, are just as exclusive.
  2. Micro-Evolution (small changes over time as a form of adaptation) is a fact, and I don’t think any Christian with any sort of scientific education could reasonably deny that.  The problem is Macro-Evolution (many small changes resulting in a new species) is simply a theory, because there is not enough evidence to let it be a fact.  As another note, some Christians are Theistic-Evolutionists, meaning they believe that God created the natural mechanisms for macro-evolution.  Personally, I don’t put a lot of belief into this because it simply doesn’t affect how people come to salvation.  If you are a Christian and find this essential to your beliefs, you can go ahead and debate this until the end of the world, or some new scientific theory pops up, but my opinion is that you are wasting your breath.
  3. Trinitatian beliefs are way too complicated, but in short, we believe in one God, not to mention I think it’s extremely rude for Christians to laugh at other belief systems.  You should read my post on Trinitarianism.
  4. Well, I think this is an unfortunate thing that we automatically associate Allah with terrorism.  Some would argue for Allah being the same as YHWH (I disagree, but you are entitled to your own opinion).  Do I agree with terrorism?  No.  Can I justify God’s actions?  No.  Did God provide a chance for those people He allowed to die to repent?  Sure thing.  Open up a bible and read away.
  5. The Holy Spirit didn’t impregnate anyone, as far as I read.  It’s easy to summarize that and add a touch of satire, and I’ll admit, a little smirk went across my face while I read that.  There are lots of theories about this, but I would have people look at it more from a perspective of a doctor artificially inseminating a woman.  We don’t see the doctor as a pervert having sex with the client, so why see it here in this context?
  6. Christians who find it worth-while to debate how old the earth is, or try and disprove science are wasting their time.  As Christians, we can date Abraham to about 1400 BCE (that’s history, not opinion – look it up yourself!), and from there, add a few estimates and say the earth is a certain age, that’s where we find young-earth scientists.  Does it really matter how old the earth is, in terms of Christianity?  Not really.  Should Christians try and disprove science?  No.  Science’s aim is to prove everything that is imperical.  Because imperical measurements are based within our five senses, they cannot include the super natural.  I am okay with that.  Science never said it could answer all things.
  7. Aside from a few, it’s safe to say most religions are exclusive.  If you don’t go to heaven (or whatever version of paradise), you either come back to earth to correct mistakes, or you suffer, whether that’s ceasing to exist or some version of hell.  People get upset about hell.  My short message to that is, if you don’t believe in Christianity, why are you concerned about hell?  Hell isn’t even close to the main message of Christianity.  Christianity is about Christ, who will freely give salvation to those who choose to accept it.
  8. People who are sensationalists, or get hyped up about manifestations of God instead of the provider of those manifestations are usually the people who are not well rooted in their faith.  I would also maybe explore the genuineness of these manifestations.  I believe God does manifest Himself in tongues, among many other things, but that shouldn’t ever be the focus.  Focus on the giver, not the gift.
  9. I cannot deny the success rate of prayer to be low, but I can explain it, although it is certainly up for debate and is mostly my opinion.  As Christians, we have authority in prayer, the kind of authority that we could equate to going to a really good restaurant, ordering something, and receiving exactly what you asked for in a timely manner (although I would say prayer can be instantaneous).  The problem with Christians is we pray as if we don’t have this authority, or we pray things that are directly against the will of God.  For instance, if someone is sick, most Christians will pray something like this: “God, if it’s Your will, could you please heal <name> of <sickness>?”  I would suggest this type of action:  You pray for God to manifest healing, then you witness God healing.  That’s how Jesus did every single healing (aside from He didn’t have to ask for the manifestation, as He was already God), so why do Christians apply this formula of ritualistic prayer?  I don’t know.
  10. The sad thing about the institutionalized church is that it often doesn’t provide much teaching on church history, or more-than-the-standard-sermon’s-worth of biblical knowledge.  I would also say that many Christians don’t seem to be that interested, which is a shame, in my opinion.  It’s easier to study something when you have motivation.  For instance, atheists that want to challenge Christians/Christianity have the motivation to study church history and the text (or proof texts, as both seem to be used).  To be honest, this is a problem with the people and not really the church.  There are various resources for any person to get free education on both the history of the church and studies on the bible.  Unfortunately, the loudest Christians are the ones that don’t always know what they’re talking about.

10 thoughts on “Christian response to what everyone else thinks we believe

  1. Thank you. I must say that I thoroughly enjoyed your entry. I’m a senior at Texas A&M, a powerfully Conservative “Christian” place, and a would be willing to bet that a large population of Christians on campus (often myself included) would get all red in the face and flustered if presented with statements like those in the picture to which you linked. I appreciate that you make no apologies for whatever discrepancies arise between common Christian standpoints and scientific theories and facts. I’m in the camp that I can’t deny what I’ve learned about micro-evolution, having studied in the sciences for the past 5 years, and those were some of the best explanations I’ve read reconciling faith with science. I just want you to know that you’ve encouraged me to strengthen my values and standpoints and faith. Keep on doing good in the world, brother.


  2. None of that stuff in the Bible ever really happened. And I don’t believe for a second that anyone really believes that it did. People just say that they do because they are afraid of what other people would think if they said otherwise. Religion serves but one purpose and that is the acquisition and maintenance of great wealth and political power. Remove the money and the politics from any religion and you don’t have a religion.

    1. Hi, Mark. I can understand your skepticism with all the news reports about how the Christian church is using money, or their political agendas or whatever else.
      Religion is definitely a source of power and corruption, but the Bible does not reveal Christianity this way, however, many public and problematic churches have twisted the Bible for their own agendas, and that has been going on for a long time, sadly. Personally, I have left the Church institution to pursue Christian spirituality, because the institute is essentially just how you described it. I’m sorry if you have had bad experiences with the church. I’d love to answer questions for you, though, if you have any, as it seems you have been another victim of the abused church, and I would like to help get that right, if not with the Church then at least with the concept of Christianity.
      I do, however, respect where you’re coming from, and want you to know that I don’t want to convert you (my spirituality tells me that’s between you and God), but I do want to be able to inform you if I can.
      Take care,

    2. If Christianity were about money and power, why does it always promote the poor for “they will inherit the earth”. if i were in power that is not a message I would want to deliver. Also why is it that in wealthy powerful nations, (I.e. America and Europe) have dwindling number in church, but in nations where the poor gather together and can be killed, tortured or beaten (China, Russia, Middle east, Parts of Africa) the numbers for church attendance is sky rocketing? The church thrives when it’s members AND leaders are poor, not when they are wealthy. The Catholics are a prime example, they’re actually thinking about hawking some items off at auctions to maintain the Holy See.

      1. I agree that Christianity isn’t about money and power, but I can definitely say that many people within the church, past and present, have used Christianity as a means of obtaining power and money, and it usually turns the spirituality of Christianity into a dull religion of rituals, and I agree that some Catholic churches have done this, particularly with the powerful position of the papacy within the Roman Catholic Branch.
        I don’t know if Christian growth is particularly based on a lack of money, but I know that humbleness is certainly key, which can specifically be rooted in being poor.
        Thanks for your comments, Yitzak,

  3. I’m surprised you were actually prepared to grant #10 at all. I know a number of atheists who think they know a good deal about bilical studies and theology, and more often than not what they actually believe about those things is largely skewed and mistaken. For example I can easily imagine an atheists reading, say, The Jesus Mysteries by Freke and Gandy, thinking that it made them knowledgeable about things that Christians are ignorant of, and then making a claim like that found in #10.

    In other words, it’s a product of the generous stance that (some, but very few) atheists take towards shoddy – but sceptical – scholarship.

    (I say “sceptical” rather than skeptical because I’m not an American.)

    1. Hi, Glenn,
      Well, I should qualify my statement, and that is to say that usually Atheists have more motivation to go through the Bible and try and challenge Christians than Christians do to know what they believe. I have based my opinion from my experiences in Bible college, where there are many students who don’t know scripture, or make claims in scripture that don’t actually exist.
      This, of course, is not always the case, as I know many educated Christians, too, that like myself study scripture and come to logical conclusions about what to believe.
      Glenn, in that sense, I am quite happy to hear that you and people you know aren’t uneducated or lack wisdom in scripture, and I would like to encourage you to remain that way, too. :)
      Thanks for your comment,

  4. Alex, my apologies in advance if I’m picking at your words…you may not have intended what it seems like you wrote – “…like myself, study scripture and come to logical conclusions about what to believe.”

    I know this is going to sound a bit extreme, but I believe it is basically true. As Bible believing Christian’s we can’t really come to “logical conclusions” about what to believe in the Bible. That would assume we could understand the creator of the universe. I know we can’t just instantly believe the Bible to be the word of God, but I think mature Christians need to get to this belief at some point. Otherwise, our limited understanding begins to shape our conclusions – I think this takes away the sharp two-edged sword from the Bible.

    I’m sure this sounds a bit fanatical and know we can’t turn off our minds when reading, but basically we must believe what it says…IE. If the Bible says there was a flood that covered the earth, then we must believe it. Otherwise, we can’t claim any of the Bible is trustworthy.

    1. Hi, Norm,
      I certainly agree that logic alone won’t put people in relationship with God, but for someone who already believes in the Judeo-Christian God, it is possible to come to some logical conclusions about Him. This doesn’t mean that human beings can understand God, but it does mean that God has revealed pieces about Himself that human beings can understand, and through that, we can logically deduce certain aspects of God. That’s called biblical theology.
      It sounds like you interpreted me as saying if an event in the bible isn’t logical it couldn’t have happened. Don’t worry, that’s now where I stand at all. I am a firm believer in the supernatural, and base my logic around what the Bible says, not what makes the most natural sense.
      Take care, Norm,

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s