What Do Non-Christians Really Think Of Us??

[missmuffet]

Many are bewildered by how horrible we can be to one another at times. Even more bewildered when we use Bible verses to beat each other with.

 LOL!

[MorningGlory]

The article speaks the truth...but only to a certain point.  Yes, there ARE self-righteous, hateful Christians.  They will have to settle that account with God.  The majority of us allow differing opinions without belittling them and truly want everyone to be saved.  Telling us to be quiet is contrary to our commandment from God to spread His Word.  Once we have spoken about it, and the other person has turned a deaf ear, we are to move on.  We can't be friends or mates, of nonbelievers.  But we CAN pray for them.  The woman in the article strikes me as very judgemental and hostile; I thought Buddhists didn't believe in being harsh toward others.   

[Guest ninhao]

Yeah same here. If it weren't for some apologists who took the time to thoroughly learn the issues and hone certain arguments I don't know where I'd be today. I can say that in my case God used those to get me thinking and knock me out of my complacent unbelief. 

 

I will go further and say that I wish people, in general, would take this stuff more seriously. There seems to be this attitude that 'arguments won't convert anyone' which translates into 'I'm not going to bother looking very deeply at them'. While it's true that I think for many if not most unbelievers no matter what you say they won't budge or listen, for some, at some times, it can make*all the difference*. If what we as Christians believe is true then why shouldn't we expect the truth to have better more powerful evidence and arguments to support it? Your second point about people patiently taking the time to get to know people etc also seems to matter a great deal. It's a combination of people being equipped enough to handle honest questions and challenges with a willingness to otherwise act on belief.

 

 

I think Bary the problem lies when we ( Christians ) insist upon reacting to every ( or many ) situations with argument. God's desire is that we provide non believers with a reason to praise Him and often our own good intended arguments don't do this. We have no need to prove or insist God is real He does that well Himself. We are to present reasons God should be praised through Christ within us.

 

I find the opportunity for argument is not when I desire; but when God provides the reason, and then a good seed is planted.

[Guest ninhao]

 

 

Yeah same here. If it weren't for some apologists who took the time to thoroughly learn the issues and hone certain arguments I don't know where I'd be today. I can say that in my case God used those to get me thinking and knock me out of my complacent unbelief. 

 

I will go further and say that I wish people, in general, would take this stuff more seriously. There seems to be this attitude that 'arguments won't convert anyone' which translates into 'I'm not going to bother looking very deeply at them'. While it's true that I think for many if not most unbelievers no matter what you say they won't budge or listen, for some, at some times, it can make*all the difference*. If what we as Christians believe is true then why shouldn't we expect the truth to have better more powerful evidence and arguments to support it? Your second point about people patiently taking the time to get to know people etc also seems to matter a great deal. It's a combination of people being equipped enough to handle honest questions and challenges with a willingness to otherwise act on belief.

 

 

I think Bary the problem lies when we ( Christians ) insist upon reacting to every ( or many ) situations with argument. God's desire is that we provide non believers with a reason to praise Him and often our own good intended arguments don't do this. We have no need to prove or insist God is real He does that well Himself. We are to present reasons God should be praised through Christ within us.

 

I find the opportunity for argument is not when I desire; but when God provides the reason, and then a good seed is planted.

 

 

 

Well, to be fair, where did you get the idea that you were called to corner strangers with arguments? If what you believe as a Christian is true, it will be evident in your walk, and this is your best definition of "witness." Proselytizing is not supported by Scripture.

 

What I see in both of these responses is a misunderstanding of what is meant by 'argument'. By argument I don't mean yelling at someone, or even heated debate. I mean a well thought out line of reasoning that demonstrates some truth. If you are engaged in a discussion with someone and they say something like "I just see no reason to believe that God exists. In fact, I think the problem of evil is clear evidence that God doesn't" you can respond with an apologetic argument. If you are familiar with them you can give well thought out responses to this person, and based on what you know about them, try to orient it in a way that responds to their style of reasoning and using terms they are familiar with.

 

The problem is when Christians think it's enough to just 'walk the walk'. It isn't. No content comes across that way, particularly in this environment these days in which people honestly think the Christian position is intellectually weak and they'd be irrational to embrace it. No matter how cool they think you are, or how sincere, they aren't going to be able to be able to really listen to the gospel.

 

 

I also do not mean yelling etc. I suggest there are situations where we are called to debate and others where we are not. These times should be determined by God and not us. If we think we can "argue/debate/present evidence ( or any other term we like ) which will convince a non believer we may be sorely mistaken.

 

I find the opportunity for argument is not when I desire; but when God provides the reason, and then a good seed is planted.

[MorningGlory]

 

Wadr, this is sad to me. I guess I'll start sounding like a broken record; but where did you get the idea that you were supposed to "convert" people with conversation? (as if I didn't know)

 

 

Who is 'wadr'?

 

Let's see: what better way is there to scare someone away from an unfamiliar concept, but by zealously cornering them and presenting an impassioned diatribe?

 

 

Where do you see 'impassioned diatribe in my post?

 

I'm curious how you might gauge that someone is an "unbeliever." What if you (gasp) become "friends" before you have ascertained this?

 

 

What does that have to do with the subject?  In the article, the woman tells the other woman that she is an nonbeliever; i.e., a Buddhist.

 

Lastly--if you will; I mean no disrespect here--why did the Buddhist lady strike you so?

 

 

Did you READ the article? Quote: "Christians are so selfish and self-centered! Tell me – when was the last time an atheist rang your doorbell to tell you about his worldview? The reason the world hates Christians is because they behave badly, they're rude, boorish, arrogant, conceited, full of themselves, ignorant, and judgmental. Go ahead – accuse me of being judgmental now. Doesn't matter – I don't claim to follow a belief system that has actual rules AGAINST being judgmental, so it's *fine* for me to be!"

 

 I am Christian, and I thought a fair, tho certainly not universal, scenario was represented; a closed-minded "Christian" attempting the usual strong-armed, perceptionless "conversion" (for like, "brownie points" or something?) of another believer who had a different definition of spirituality--when Scripture tells us that it is what is in a person's heart, and not in their words, that will save them. Buddhists excepted?

 

 

I get a lot of contempt from your statement.  As for Buddhists; they are nonbelievers and will NOT be in the Kingdom.  Uness they come to the Lord, of course.  I don't believe in proseltyzing or strong arming anyone.  As I said, tell them the Truth and if they choose not to hear, walk away. 

[Guest ninhao]

 

I never said we shouldn't be guided by the Spirit-- but it's better when we can be prepared to offer responses.

 

 

Perhaps like this.

 

1Pe_3:15  But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:

 

[enoob57]

 

 

 

I never said we shouldn't be guided by the Spirit-- but it's better when we can be prepared to offer responses.

 

 

Perhaps like this.

 

1Pe_3:15  But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:

 

 

Yes, ninhao. I recently wrote a thread surrounding that verse in particular. That is certainly what I had in mind.

 

The Spirit lead Jesus perfectly: Matt 23

[MorningGlory]

 

 

3) ok, that (pt 1) was meant to be taken personally. You said that you could not be friends with an unbeliever?

 

Believers are not to marry or keep the company of nonbelievers.  That's basic.

 

(pt 2) How can this "Christian" lady know to say that the Buddhist lady was an unbeliever? Because she uses a different model than the Christian? Why not just slap her in the face?

 

 

You use the 'Christian' reference in a demeaning way.  The Christian lady knew the other lady was a nonbeliever becaise said lady TOLD HER so.  Buddhists don't believe in ANY God, Christian or otherwise.

 

We are told in Scripture that it is what comes out of a person's mouth that condemns them; I suggest to you that the "Christian" has prolly condemned herself, here, imo. I'd say don't fall into the Western Christian trap of believing that those who don't follow your definition of Christ are somehow lost.

 

 

My definition?  There is only ONE definition of Jesus; He is our Savior and the only way to the Father.   The Christian woman has not condemned herself; she has attempted to reach out to a nonbeliever.  (And 'prolly' isn't a word I'm familiar with.)  Nonbelievers ARE lost as put forth in Scripture.....

 

• "Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved." (Acts 4:12)

 

 

• Jesus said "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:5-7)

 

 

4) Well, for the most part, I agree with the Buddhist here. The Christian lady demon~strated that she did not really care about the Buddhist lady; she was out like a light the moment it became clear that the Buddhist was not a pushover. All talk, no action. I mean no disrespect, but obv a much better path would have been when the Buddhist lady asked the other about her beliefs, because she had seen Life, more abundantly demonstrated, and had not been previously proselytized.

 

 

Your attempt at clever word usage reveals more than you know.  Believers are only required to ATTEMPT to reach nonbelievers; if they reject the message we are to walk away. 

 

5) Hmm, contempt for whom? If I am displaying any contempt, it is my failing. I completely understand even the Christian's position here, as poisoned by false doctrine as it is--I was her. "As for Buddhists; they are nonbelievers and will NOT be in the Kingdom" I'm sorry, but you have no Scriptural basis for saying this. You cannot know this. The separation parable argues against this. Proselytizing is what the Christian lady was doing. How can you tell them the truth, when you don't know what it is?

 

 

Jesus said 'none comes to the Father except through me.'  What is not clear about that?  It's the very basis of our faith.  I'm quite aware of the Truth, thank you, and I would suggest you read your Bible to understand that nonbelievers will NOT go to heaven.  The Christian lady did what she was supposed to do; she made an attempt to reach out and was rejected....she then dropped the whole thing.  It says nothing about her pressuring or twisting the arm of the nonbeliever.  The Buddhist however states exactly what she thinks of Christians in her nasty little rant. 

[MorningGlory]

 How do you say hypocrite nicely?

 

 

There is no way to do that nicely.  But you seem to have a universalist view of faith.......there is only ONE God, ONE way to salvation and ONE Truth.  Jesus is the way, the ONLY way and to say anything else is to directly oppose the Lord.  Christians who speak the Truth are doing what they should do.....everything else is Christian  Lite, a watered down counterfeit form of Christianity. 

[Gandalf]

 How do you say hypocrite nicely?

 

There is no way to do that nicely.  But you seem to have a universalist view of faith.......there is only ONE God, ONE way to salvation and ONE Truth.  Jesus is the way, the ONLY way and to say anything else is to directly oppose the Lord.  Christians who speak the Truth are doing what they should do.....everything else is Christian  Lite, a watered down counterfeit form of Christianity. 

I think that living the truth is at least as important as speaking the truth. If you are not visibly living the truth, you have no authority to speak it!