[Drabdr]

I typically am not in the business of recommending things, as most people come to discussion boards to engage in thought and such. However....

I highly recommend the book Unchristian to the entire group. That would be those who identify themselves as "Christians" and those who would not identify themselves as “Christians”.

The authors of the book are Christians, and the primary audience of the book are those who identify themselves as Christians. However, the book is good reading for all.

The book outlines research done over three years or so. Specifically, the research is interested in the perceptions of people with Christianity, religion and the like. Notice the word perception is highlighted.

One of the most disturbing observations was the really large number who identify Christians as hypocritical. The people interviewed identified themselves as being active in a church and not active in a church (or an outsider, for lack of a better term). While the hypocrite label was much higher among the outsiders, there were still an alarming number of people within the church who labeled Christians as hypocrites.

Another one of the main topics is that Christians are viewed are anti-homosexual.

Now...the author is not suggesting that belief systems be watered down, or that he is asserting Christians are hypocritical; only that they are perceived as hypocritical.

Main point: as Christians move forward to bring outsiders into their group and add to the numbers, many times we may fall into the notion that the outsiders are "un-churched", do not know the bible, do not understand God's Grace and Law, etc. Possibly quite the opposite is true, they are quite "churched" and know their bible well. The problem is not a respect or understanding of developing a relationship with God, but rather perceptions and experience with religions and the people within those religions. Christians need to understand these perceptions, and realize they have some work to do.

Please.... I am probably butchering their book. It's well written, concise, the research seems to be fairly well done, and does provide some level of objective information when discussing issues of perception and hypocrisy.

1. Are Christians really hypocritical, or just perceived to be hypocritical?
2. Are these perceptions things which can be managed better while holding to core beliefs, or will that just be the way things are?
3. How much is the Mass Media helping/ hurting these perceptions of Christians?

[thingamajig]

I generally perceive that many Christians are hypocritical.

While I might often complain about those who judge the many by the actions of a few, I think we non-Christians may be observing the actions of the many and applying to all including the few. A good friend since high school hosts a local contemporary Christian music morning show and I find it inspirational. Yet, I must say that such sources are few and far between.

Of course, as you know, I turned away from Christianity though I know the Bible and it's teachings well. Perhaps I have committed the unpardonable sin. I have no intention of buying or reading the book. I consider it a waste of my time as would many other non-believers. I don't think your religion will grow it's ranks from those who are "churched" but have already made up their mind.

By stepping outside and looking at it from outside of the forest, I have noticed that the message has changed considerably over the years or that those of faith just don't practice what they preach.

No offense intended. It's just not my thing anymore.

[Drabdr]

Thingy, thanks for responding. Honestly, I was kind of hoping you would.

I posted this as an honest look of christians, and how the world perceives us. I would expect the answers to be honest, but not brutal or attacking. So as yours was here, a honest but fair response on the subject.

Originally Posted by thingamajig

I generally perceive that many Christians are hypocritical.

Interestingly, the primary audience of the research was a generation below yours and mine. He was mainly looking at like 19-24 year olds.

While I might often complain about those who judge the many by the actions of a few, I think we non-Christians may be observing the actions of the many and applying to all including the few. A good friend since high school hosts a local contemporary Christian music morning show and I find it inspirational. Yet, I must say that such sources are few and far between.

Fair enough. If you don't mind me asking, though....

You state your friend is inspirational. Do you also feel he is not a hypocrite? And why?

Again.... I mean no disrespect whatsoever; just trying to figure out a little more about the perceptions.

Of course, as you know, I turned away from Christianity though I know the Bible and it's teachings well. Perhaps I have committed the unpardonable sin. I have no intention of buying or reading the book. I consider it a waste of my time as would many other non-believers.

If I were you, I would feel the same about it being a waste of time. I didn't intend for it to provide any defense or supplement for christianity. Actually, I think the book does more to strengthen the case of non-believers a bit.

I recommend it because this is a smart crowd, who I think would enjoy the research/results done on the subject.

I don't think your religion will grow it's ranks from those who are "churched" but have already made up their mind.

You're probably right. However... I think that approaching those who have already made up their mind may have a large part to do with the perceptions they have about the church and christians. But.... not sure if that can be managed in a short time frame.

By stepping outside and looking at it from outside of the forest, I have noticed that the message has changed considerably over the years or that those of faith just don't practice what they preach.

I don't know which one alarms me more, the message changing, or people not practicing what they preach. Why would a message 2000 years old ever change? But, I know you are correct.

In looking at the things that were soooo important when I was a kid that aren't that important now, one would think the bible went through a revision.

[thingamajig]

Originally Posted by Drabdr

Fair enough. If you don't mind me asking, though....

You state your friend is inspirational. Do you also feel he is not a hypocrite? And why?

The morning show has no politics. It has no sensationalist news. It does not judge others or seek to find fault. There is no belittling of any type of prejudicial or hate-filled rhetoric. The commentary is forever positive and optimistic. There is wisdom in the discussion like the need to question ourselves, our progress, our role in society, our responsibility to others and the planet, etc every day less we take the wrong path.

The message represents what I think a truly merciful and loving god would be. The one generally taught to us at the local church is not one I would want to follow. This was a long thought-out position that I have taken and it did not come lightly.

[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by thingamajig

The morning show has no politics. It has no sensationalist news. It does not judge others or seek to find fault. There is no belittling of any type of prejudicial or hate-filled rhetoric. The commentary is forever positive and optimistic. There is wisdom in the discussion like the need to question ourselves, our progress, our role in society, our responsibility to others and the planet, etc every day less we take the wrong path.

The message represents what I think a truly merciful and loving god would be. The one generally taught to us at the local church is not one I would want to follow. This was a long thought-out position that I have taken and it did not come lightly.

[LANMaster]

Christians are admittedly hypocritical, for the most part.
We all try to live righteous lives, which is impossible for mere humans do do.
There is none without sin, not one.
We Christians need to remember this fact when dealing with other people, Christians and non-Christians alike.
Christian arrogance is a sin. We are no more deserving of salvation than the worst among us.
The thief on the cross was saved, as Jesus promised, while the pius Pharisees and Sadducees were damned.
The greater sin is not recognizing that we are unworthy, and there is not a damned thing (pun intended) that a Christian can do to make himself worthy of salvation.
That said, If our faith is real, we will try to live a righteous life, in spite of our sin nature, and die to our own fleshly desires, to live for Christ.

To live for Christ is not to condemn the sinner, but to live Christ-like. Christ did not condemn Mary, but saved her from the pius religious hypocrites who would have stoned her to death for her crime of adultery, for which she was clearly guilty.
We Christians need to be mindful of this fact when we gather up stones with the intent to hurl them at sinners.

We are saved by grace, through faith. And if Adolf Hitler confessed faith in Christ before his death, then he is every bit as saved as Billy Graham, or me, or you.

If our actions, no matter how righteous, serve to push the lost farther away from Christ, then we have done NOTHING pleasing to Christ.



Without reading the book, it sounds like the Author has this Christian frame of mind, which I applaud.

[LANMaster]

Originally Posted by thingamajig

I generally perceive that many Christians are hypocritical.

While I might often complain about those who judge the many by the actions of a few, I think we non-Christians may be observing the actions of the many and applying to all including the few. A good friend since high school hosts a local contemporary Christian music morning show and I find it inspirational. Yet, I must say that such sources are few and far between.

Of course, as you know, I turned away from Christianity though I know the Bible and it's teachings well. Perhaps I have committed the unpardonable sin. I have no intention of buying or reading the book. I consider it a waste of my time as would many other non-believers. I don't think your religion will grow it's ranks from those who are "churched" but have already made up their mind.

By stepping outside and looking at it from outside of the forest, I have noticed that the message has changed considerably over the years or that those of faith just don't practice what they preach.

No offense intended. It's just not my thing anymore.

While I would not applaud your stance, I certainly would not condemn you for it.
Ghandi was correct about the mass of Christians who do not practice Christianity.

I doubt that you have committed any unpardonable sin. If that were the case, then I would have been crispy fried decades ago.

I pray that you find your faith anew and the joy of knowing His love and faithfulness.
It is doubtful you will ever find salvation from a hypocritical Christian who thinks condemning you might make you seek out His glory.

I used to think Kirt Cameron was pretty good, and that his street ministry was pretty cool about pointing out how short we all come from deserving salvation. I now feel that his ministry is a great lesson for the already saved, and a very poor lesson for the majority of the lost.

I could go on and on for days. It is my favorite topic.

Take care, Thingy. I appreciate your response.

[thingamajig]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

While I would not applaud your stance, I certainly would not condemn you for it.
Ghandi was correct about the mass of Christians who do not practice Christianity.

I doubt that you have committed any unpardonable sin. If that were the case, then I would have been crispy fried decades ago.

I pray that you find your faith anew and the joy of knowing His love and faithfulness.
It is doubtful you will ever find salvation from a hypocritical Christian who thinks condemning you might make you seek out His glory.

I used to think Kirt Cameron was pretty good, and that his street ministry was pretty cool about pointing out how short we all come from deserving salvation. I now feel that his ministry is a great lesson for the already saved, and a very poor lesson for the majority of the lost.

I could go on and on for days. It is my favorite topic.

Take care, Thingy. I appreciate your response.

Good response all LAN. The unpardonable sin of theological debate for protestant denominations is rejecting the holy spirit after having accepted salvation.

I will address more in the cult thread, but I grew up in an environment when some ministers were teaching things like rock music was evil. This was back when there was this notion that playing a record backward produced messages from Satan. He had us so convinced (preteens) that we brought in all of our albums and turned them over to the church. I was terrified.

The moral panic of the day was satanic ritual cults.

I also recall a visit from Jimmy Swaggart. The entire sermon was about giving money to the church. I'm sure now looking back that he was there for a fund raiser and that he got a cut.

When I met science however, there is simply no going back. I believe that if their is a God, he rewards good deeds despite any formalities.

[buffoon]

I don't think that hypocrisy is monopolized by religion although that's normally what it is related to.

The issue in this thread is widely an American one (how could it not be). American in that the various denominations of Christianity followed in the States are, in their practice, quite unique to same said States.

The Puritan origin of American protestants is hardly mirrored in Protestantism over here and yet again our Protestantism differs from a country like UK (where opposition to Rome came from the king and from whence the Puritans set forth) to a country like Germany (where opposition to Rome came from a lowly monk).

One would think that Catholicism shows more homogenity but it does not, despite Rome's hegemony. The Spanish Catholic church has always had a propensity for telling Rome what is right and not the other way round.

Poland is a completely different entity, Ireland.....

To return from my digression, I have a number of Spanish friends, all stout (or maybe not so much) Catholics. Interestingly enough the females place greater value on attending church, involving themselves in charities, never missing a religious "fiesta" etc. The spirituality or need thereof appears greater. The "hombres" go 4 times. Christening, communion, marriage and the last one but on this one the chances of more permanence are also forestalled as they get carried out again.

Quintessence being that no self respecting Spanish male is gonna let a guy in a frock tell him how to arrange his life.

There is a good portion of honesty in both takes. Even if the men do go to church those 4 times because you can never be sure.

Importantly, the fact that I am not a believer bothers none of them. They have a tendency to judge fellow man by what he does and what he is, not so much by how he prays or to whom. I've never encountered a missionizing spirit here.

But there are plenty of hypocrites and it's not the church goers either.


P.S. When decades ago Billy Graham opened a local branch in a predominantly Protestant area of Germany, except for a small group of acolytes he was able to gather, all good Protestants thought him to be a hypocrite. And an American one to boot.

[LauraMJ]

I have that book. It is an excellent read and very matter-of-factly done without catering to one side or the other, or condemning one side or the other. It does not spare Christians, either, if they deserve it.

It was very much an eye opener and confirmed feelings I'd had for a while of how Christians have been acting (as a generalization) in regards to current social issues and how they are handling it......I've felt (as LAN mentions) that Christians have often been their own worst enemies, even if their intentions are good and they are doing what they truly believe to be right........I think many simply let their emotions rule far too much and allow their tempers or their zealotry get the best of them. I know I have been guilty of it myself, and it was through books like this one, and The Shack, and others that I had the opportunity to study over the last several years, plus a lot of self-examination, lol, that I began to see that I was trying to CONTROL people and their decisions, rather than just give information and leave the rest to God. There's a huge difference. This book is blunt in telling Christians that much of what is perceived about them is often their own fault and that it is up to Christians to change that. It pulls no punches in that regard, and I think it is something that every Christian needs to read. I think, that unfortunately in many congregations, Christians are very static, very narrow minded and very supercilious.......it's very unChristian and is one of the major reasons people turn away from Christianity and religion in general.

[LANMaster]

Hi thingy & Laura,

Thingamahoohaaa ......

I do not believe that Science is contradictory to the Bible.
If anything, Science only proves that we have a lot more to do when it comes to our interpretation of scripture.

The easiest example of this is the age of the earth. Science calculates what, 4.3 million years? With the Univers somewhere around 4.5 Billion? I will not dispute that. The speed of light is an incredible universal stopwatch.
And the Bible calls out a 6 day creation with some coming up with a total of 6500 years or so. (many say close to 7000 which may be a number of significance, but I digress)

Where I see no conflict in these 2 figures is the fact that the Bible describes the creation of Adam as an adult, not an infant.
So why couldn't God create the universe as an adult?

I state it this way to show you that I am not trying to twist what the Bible says to suit my own belief.
God created the universe, and I believe it. And while the Bible is God inspired, it was still written by men, leaving much to be interpreted from the word of God.

The Bible says that Adam died at the age of 930 years. But Adam was created at an existing age .... not an infant. So was Adam 930 when he died, or was he 955? Or since the lifespan was so long, perhaps he was actually older than Methuzela when he died. The bible is silent on that point, except to say that Adam was created as a man, not an infant.

I disagree with the Theologians who go for the gap theory. There simply is no scientific evidence for that asserrtion, and the Bible is silent about the possibility.

Laura, I cannot disagree with you. Christians are Christ's worst enemy far too much of the time. Christ was never arrogant, yet too many Christians are just that.

[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

Christians are admittedly hypocritical, for the most part.
We all try to live righteous lives, which is impossible for mere humans do do.

But why does that make us inherently hypocritical? We never claim perfection; I freely admit my weaknesses. But... I'm also not out railing others about the weaknesses in my own position.

Hypocritical to me is being so anti-homosexual, but then glorifying guys having a fling with their secretaries (admin assistant). This is what people see as hypocritical, IMHO, and I don't blame them.

Originally Posted by LANMaster

There is none without sin, not one.
We Christians need to remember this fact when dealing with other people, Christians and non-Christians alike.
Christian arrogance is a sin. We are no more deserving of salvation than the worst among us.
The thief on the cross was saved, as Jesus promised, while the pius Pharisees and Sadducees were damned.
The greater sin is not recognizing that we are unworthy, and there is not a damned thing (pun intended) that a Christian can do to make himself worthy of salvation.
That said, If our faith is real, we will try to live a righteous life, in spite of our sin nature, and die to our own fleshly desires, to live for Christ.

To live for Christ is not to condemn the sinner, but to live Christ-like. Christ did not condemn Mary, but saved her from the pius religious hypocrites who would have stoned her to death for her crime of adultery, for which she was clearly guilty.
We Christians need to be mindful of this fact when we gather up stones with the intent to hurl them at sinners.

We are saved by grace, through faith. And if Adolf Hitler confessed faith in Christ before his death, then he is every bit as saved as Billy Graham, or me, or you.

If our actions, no matter how righteous, serve to push the lost farther away from Christ, then we have done NOTHING pleasing to Christ.

Amen. Well done, Lan.

BTW... if you have some time, consider getting the book. It would be worth it.

[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by LauraMJ

I have that book. It is an excellent read and very matter-of-factly done without catering to one side or the other, or condemning one side or the other. It does not spare Christians, either, if they deserve it.

It was very much an eye opener and confirmed feelings I'd had for a while of how Christians have been acting (as a generalization) in regards to current social issues and how they are handling it......I've felt (as LAN mentions) that Christians have often been their own worst enemies, even if their intentions are good and they are doing what they truly believe to be right........I think many simply let their emotions rule far too much and allow their tempers or their zealotry get the best of them. I know I have been guilty of it myself, and it was through books like this one, and The Shack, and others that I had the opportunity to study over the last several years, plus a lot of self-examination, lol, that I began to see that I was trying to CONTROL people and their decisions, rather than just give information and leave the rest to God. There's a huge difference. This book is blunt in telling Christians that much of what is perceived about them is often their own fault and that it is up to Christians to change that. It pulls no punches in that regard, and I think it is something that every Christian needs to read. I think, that unfortunately in many congregations, Christians are very static, very narrow minded and very supercilious.......it's very unChristian and is one of the major reasons people turn away from Christianity and religion in general.

Hello, Laura! Not only am I glad you dropped in on this thread, but that you had (and read) the book. Like I said, I don't go around "pushing" books too much, but the two guys did a nice job on it.

[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by buffoon

I don't think that hypocrisy is monopolized by religion although that's normally what it is related to.

The issue in this thread is widely an American one (how could it not be). American in that the various denominations of Christianity followed in the States are, in their practice, quite unique to same said States.

The Puritan origin of American protestants is hardly mirrored in Protestantism over here and yet again our Protestantism differs from a country like UK (where opposition to Rome came from the king and from whence the Puritans set forth) to a country like Germany (where opposition to Rome came from a lowly monk).

One would think that Catholicism shows more homogenity but it does not, despite Rome's hegemony. The Spanish Catholic church has always had a propensity for telling Rome what is right and not the other way round.

Poland is a completely different entity, Ireland.....

To return from my digression, I have a number of Spanish friends, all stout (or maybe not so much) Catholics. Interestingly enough the females place greater value on attending church, involving themselves in charities, never missing a religious "fiesta" etc. The spirituality or need thereof appears greater. The "hombres" go 4 times. Christening, communion, marriage and the last one but on this one the chances of more permanence are also forestalled as they get carried out again.

Quintessence being that no self respecting Spanish male is gonna let a guy in a frock tell him how to arrange his life.

There is a good portion of honesty in both takes. Even if the men do go to church those 4 times because you can never be sure.

Importantly, the fact that I am not a believer bothers none of them. They have a tendency to judge fellow man by what he does and what he is, not so much by how he prays or to whom. I've never encountered a missionizing spirit here.

But there are plenty of hypocrites and it's not the church goers either.


P.S. When decades ago Billy Graham opened a local branch in a predominantly Protestant area of Germany, except for a small group of acolytes he was able to gather, all good Protestants thought him to be a hypocrite. And an American one to boot.

Thanks for the post, Buffoon. That is very interesting the views you have from your part of the world.

Funny about the perception of Billy Graham. He is about the only large-scale evangelist I would give you a nickel for.

As far as your impression of women and their dedication, that's pretty much the same thing I see here. Women are dragging the men and the women to church. To me... that adds to the hypocrite impression. Men are supposed to be the Spiritual leaders, but honestly, most of the time it is the women in the family.

And then don't get me started on the men quoting the "wives, submit to your husband" passage, but so conveniently miss the passage right before that states "submit to one another".

But your friends not "judging" you for not attending church is an exception; and good for them. You always catch more flies with honey anyway. There are so many people around here make being at church on time, every time, the core of their religious activity. No wonder people perceive us as hypocritical.

[Drabdr]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

Laura, I cannot disagree with you. Christians are Christ's worst enemy far too much of the time. Christ was never arrogant, yet too many Christians are just that.

I need to find the exact quote from the book, but the authors make a good point. They state that if we were truly living like Christ and his disciples, we would not be perceived as hypocrites. Madmen, insane, lunatics, rebels: yes. But hypocrite? no.