CreateDebate


Debate Info

13
11
Yes; too much science fluff. No; right on God's target.
Debate Score:24
Arguments:18
Total Votes:36
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes; too much science fluff. (10)
 
 No; right on God's target. (8)

Debate Creator

Rhyolite(31) pic



Does modern Christianity miss the mark?

Science and morality in an unholy union.

Yes; too much science fluff.

Side Score: 13
VS.

No; right on God's target.

Side Score: 11
2 points

When boiled down to basic understanding, the message of Christ explains that the way to eternal happiness is to love God with all one's heart, soul, and mind (Matthew 22:37), and to love one's neighbor as one loves himself (Matthew 22:39). Anything apart from this critical and crucial understanding is nonsensical and trivial.

Take a look at the young earth creationist movement. Take any Genesis reference, any little bit of scientific data, any shred of evidence either way, and nothing ties into the moral aspect of Christ - nothing. No moral message can be derived from thinking that the earth is 6000 years old or that God created the Earth in seven days. The aspects of Genesis that Christians apply to modern science offer nothing more than pagan trivia.

With that said, the promulgation of these "truths of God" have no inherent purpose at all other than to impose the presence of Christianity on the world rather than express the message of Christ to the world. Granted, Christ's message to society provides an ideal men should strive for. But mindlessly preaching defunct pseudoscience takes away from that morality by enforcing harsh complacency and control under the threat of hell and exclusion. The Christian movement stubbornly opposes modern science because of science's supposed "threat" to the Church's control over followers. Given the Christian reaction to men such as Galileo, Copernicus, and Darwin, the historical pattern is obvious.

By excluding men from the Church simply because they disagree with an archaic and worthless dictate of the faith, the Christian church inherently contradicts itself. If the purpose is to love all men as one loves himself, then why are select people excluded from the fold? If scientists go against the pagan, outdated doctrines, then Christians go against the most modern and fundamental doctrine. With that, I ask: who's the greater sinner?

Christianity ought to remove themselves entirely from scientific discourse and recognize their place in this world: to provide moral guidance and understanding for those who seek it.

Side: Yes; too much science fluff.
2 points

Incredibly well said sir. I don't know that I can offer much in addition except to say that I find the creationist movement quite perplexing in the sense that it seems to contradict the idea of faith.

The movement now seems to center around proving the Bible as scientific fact, but that really isn't something that was necessary before. To have faith, I thought, was to believe in God even though you cannot see him, talk to him, or take him out for a beer. You have to have faith that he exists simply because you cannot prove God is actually waiting for you at the end of this life.

But faith is gone now, it seems, replaced with (as you put it) defunct pseudoscience.

Side: Yes; too much science fluff.
2 points

Christ's charge to believers, in a nutshell, is "follow me". Christians are to emulate him and live according to his commands. In the United States this clearly isn't happening on a grand scale. Most churches are little more than social clubs that provide a convenient means of feeling good about one's morality and station in the world without the burden of actually serving the poor, downtrodden, and others in need. Suggestions that believers ought to do more good works are met with declarations that one is saved by grace. The hypocrisy of these sorts of believers is thus exposed. Their goal is to avoid hell not to follow Christ. I believe the real goal of these sorts of believers is to be part of a social club constantly saying that one is saved by grace is a rationalization for not doing anything Christ like. The modern church largely misses the mark.

Side: Yes; too much science fluff.
dcovan(170) Banned
1 point

Yes it does.One thing Ive never understood.In Genesis why do people assume that when god made the earth and stars etc in 7 days that they automatically think he was on a 24 hr day.A day could be any time period.Away from that modern Christianity in my opinion misses its mark the most on the message of Christ.Every thing he spoke happened before his Crucifixion and his sacrificing himself for everyones sins.Once he made that sacrifice all sins forgave.Through faith in him being strong enough to take away your sin not faith in yourself not to sin.Christianity will always seem hypocritical to nonbelievers because modern Christians say they are born again and don't sin and live error free lives which is impossible.there is none good but one That is the message that should be taught.One! The Way the Truth the Light.

Side: Yes; too much science fluff.
Rhyolite(31) Disputed
0 points

I have to oppose you on several grounds.

Firstly, regarding your statements on the amount of time in a day. A day could last a few hours or a few years depending on what planet I'm on - but it doesn't matter. If you are convinced that the amount of time in the day of a deity is absolutely essential to faith, please tell me what kind of moral message I am supposed to obtain from that.

Secondly, with the multitude of religions and worldviews scattered across this Earth, what honestly gives this faith the right to call itself the one and only "true" faith? I have no problems with atheism, Islam, Buddhism - all of these viewpoints have their strong points and focus of morality. I cannot say that Christianity is THE path; I can only say it has a strong ideal message. By putting Christianity on a pedestal and excluding other lines of thought from entering the fold, you effectively exclude others from reaching higher mental and moral grounds, Christians included. Should that exclusion turn to prejudice, can you really hold true to the core - love all men as you would love yourself?

Thirdly - and this is only on a technical note - please put spaces between the period and the beginning of the next sentence. Granted, no one is perfect, but it would be much appreciated.

Side: No; right on God's target.
dcovan(170) Disputed Banned
0 points

Firstly,the amount of time in a day thing was strictly about the book of Genesis and the creation story.None of that is essential to my faith.That was what I was ineffectively getting at. Secondly,the debate was about modern Christianity not other faiths and religions.Great points but they are not important on this debate.As a Christian there is only one path, yet you speak of holding true to the core.In my faith thats my interpretation. Thirdly,you can kiss my a$$.lol.Not doing it on this one out of pride but maybe from now on.Thx.

Side: Yes; too much science fluff.
0 points

I don't know but I do know that the old Christianity nailed it!

Side: Yes; too much science fluff.
3 points

I agree that the heart, soul, and mind are arguably the same thing, but this meant that you need to fully love God with all of your being. If Jesus meant to only love your fellow Israelite why did he consistently show love to the Samaritans? And why did the Apostles consistently pray for the Gentiles, whom apparently they weren't supposed to care about?

Jesus didn't preach about eternal torture. It just isn't there. The Ten Commandments do promise punishment to Israelites if they don't obey them because they voluntarily entered a covenant. The Old Covenant doesn't apply to us because of Jesus and His message, which again didn't include torture.

And, in conclusion, stating "we're right and you're wrong" is somewhat intolerant, don't you think?

This is a response to geoff.

Side: No; right on God's target.
2 points

Modern Christianity does miss the mark on some points, but when has Christianity ever been perfect? Even Paul had to deal with false teachings and the like. The fact is Christianity has never hit the mark and never will. I do think some churches miss the mark more than others, but the question "does modern Christianity miss the mark" is a pretty sweeping generalization. Assuming this just refers to Christianity in America, there is a massive diversity of churches in America: religious right churches, Roman Catholicism, nondenominational churches, and many, many others. The Salvation Army is part of this modern Christianity and it provides billions of dollars worth of social aid each year. Revolution Church is another excellent example of modern Christianity playing its proper role. On the whole modern Christianity provide billions with a morality to be better people

Side: No; right on God's target.
1 point

True, the argument does make quite a generalization, but I'm glad someone brought in some specifics. Yes, the Salvation Army does provide aid to millions and accurately lives out Christ's message. Also, believe it or not, I hadn't heard of Revolution Church until a week ago - imagine my surprise to find that my personal views of God and religion nearly coincided. In my mind, Revolution Church embodies the most modern church and a step forward regarding the Christian faith.

I suppose I should change the title to "Does creationist Christianity miss the mark?" though I'm trying to make the connection between how Christian "science" completely ignores the basic ideal of Christ's message. I already know why creationism is completely and utterly ridiculous, so I try to avoid listening to the same litanies from either side of that particular debate over and over again.

Aside from that, well put, sir.

Side: No; right on God's target.
-1 points

Christianity teaches segregation and intolerance, so it's right on message. The 'modern' churches which transmit Christian teaching do so by feting the necessary ignorance that is faith, the nonsense that is prayer and the stifling of intellectual enquiry that is the process of catechism.

Side: No; right on God's target.
Rhyolite(31) Disputed
1 point

The greatest commandments: to love God with all your heart, soul, and mind, and to love your neighbor as yourself.

If we accept your premise as true - that modern Christianity preaches segregation and intolerance - then it clearly missed its core belief, didn't it? If that's the case, then why do you believe that Christianity's core teaching is one of hate and bigotry? If you do not, then why is your argument on the wrong side of this board?

Any shock-value atheist can tell me that faith is ignorant or that prayer is useless, so unless you have meaningful material to contribute to this argument and are willing to explain why you think Christianity's main message is one of segregation and intolerance, do so.

Side: Yes; too much science fluff.