anti-christianism ~ Sakinorva Databank

The Sakinorva Databank

anti-christianism

ideology

in Philosophy, Psychology, and Social Sciences

anti-christianism ~ Sakinorva Databank

anti-christianism

ideology

Philosophy, Psychology, and Social Sciences

e

i

n

s

f

t

p

j

function

ennea

variant

socio

psyche

INTJ 4

cp5w6 3

cp6w5 1

sp/sx 1

so/sx 1

LSI 2

VLEF 1

LFVE 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1

h

e

x

a

c

o

total votes 24

7

4

4

2

1

2

2

Click to toggle markup guide.

bold	bold
italic	italic
hyperlink to "contextualizing functions"	[hyperlink to "contextualizing functions"](https://sakinorva.net/library/contextualizing_functions)
	(i){https://i.imgur.com/g0oL9CB.png}

You may not modify this entry's picture.

	fg xxTJ 6w5 Beta ST 2020/01/01 (Wed) 04:36:42 #7605
	objective characteristics of christianism: an unniversalist religion, a religion of individual salute, belief in a world post-life who is supposed to be superior to the other (the superior order is not here in this earth but elsewhere), shaming of the desire (particulary feminine). consequences today: destruction of political structure by devaluation of political life by the overvalue of the individual over the super-structure, the illusion in an anti-political way to reach hapiness, the christian european christian world is far more apathetic politically than the old europe used to be, liberalism is no more than the political or more anti-political child of christiannim, destruction of nation/the politic because of unniversalism (as i know a citizen is a citizen of a country, citizen of the world is contradictory) .The shaming of desire make less easier the connexion between men and women. man is a political/social animal he only can reach hapiness by actualising this nature. Christiannism as a corpus ideological is despicable for all this characteristics that i quoted impede men to actualise his nature.

Editing post #7605 by fg <p>objective characteristics of christianism: an unniversalist religion, a religion of individual salute, belief in a world post-life who is supposed to be superior to the other (the superior order is not here in this earth but elsewhere), shaming of the desire (particulary feminine).</p> <p>consequences today: destruction of political structure by devaluation of political life by the overvalue of the individual over the super-structure, the illusion in an anti-political way to reach hapiness, the christian european christian world is far more apathetic politically than the old europe used to be, liberalism is no more than the political or more anti-political child of christiannim, destruction of nation/the politic because of unniversalism (as i know a citizen is a citizen of a country, citizen of the world is contradictory) .The shaming of desire make less easier the connexion between men and women. man is a political/social animal he only can reach hapiness by actualising this nature. Christiannism as a corpus ideological is despicable for all this characteristics that i quoted impede men to actualise his nature.</p>
Replying to post #7605 by fg

	Tman INTP 5w4/1w9/4w5 Sx/Sp ILI 2020/01/01 (Wed) 00:14:57 #7604
	In response to post #7601. Jacobus, I'm not sure if you really did refute your first example. You called it "subjective" to say that christianty dose harm to society, but is this really a crticism? I supose it is subjective, in the sense that it involves asigning certin creeds, ideas, and manners of behavor to a religous movment. But if your agianst that, then how can the word "Christian" mean anything at all? You can't denny that certin patereness and trends do exist amounst people who call themselves "christians." For example, a tendcy towards wearing crosses, or a belif in a monthietic but triune God. All that it remains for FG to prove is that such as he has listed really are A: harmfull B: chartististics of christianity.

Editing post #7604 by Tman <p>Jacobus, I'm not sure if you really did refute your first example. You called it "subjective" to say that christianty dose harm to society, but is this really a crticism? I supose it is subjective, in the sense that it involves asigning certin creeds, ideas, and manners of behavor to a religous movment. But if your agianst that, then how can the word "Christian" mean anything at all? You can't denny that certin patereness and trends do exist amounst people who call themselves "christians." For example, a tendcy towards wearing crosses, or a belif in a monthietic but triune God. All that it remains for FG to prove is that such as he has listed really are A: harmfull B: chartististics of christianity. </p>
Replying to post #7604 by Tman

	Jacobus INFJ 4w5 EIE 2019/12/31 (Tue) 18:43:56 #7601
	In response to post #7600. You just restated nearly exactly one of the views I explicitly referred to as not being based on reason. Your argument is unreasonable because it's untenable that there's some teleological endpoint that civilization can progress towards or regress from, and it's untenable that religious belief serves a specific psychological purpose considering what Christianity (in this case) is and why it's necessary to believe it is different for each individual Christian. What you wrote is not a rational counterargument but a subjective view of Christianity that you refuse to recognize as being based on your own experiences and emotions regarding the religion, rather than coming through any true research or rational thinking, which would come later as a bulwark for already held beliefs, if at all.

Editing post #7601 by Jacobus <p>You just restated nearly exactly one of the views I explicitly referred to as not being based on reason. Your argument is unreasonable because it's untenable that there's some teleological endpoint that civilization can progress towards or regress from, and it's untenable that religious belief serves a specific psychological purpose considering what Christianity (in this case) is and why it's necessary to believe it is different for each individual Christian. What you wrote is not a rational counterargument but a subjective view of Christianity that you refuse to recognize as being based on your own experiences and emotions regarding the religion, rather than coming through any true research or rational thinking, which would come later as a bulwark for already held beliefs, if at all.</p>
Replying to post #7601 by Jacobus

	fg xxTJ 6w5 Beta ST 2019/12/31 (Tue) 17:16:04 #7600
	you are quite an incult and ridiculous in your reasoning as usual. it is possible to be anti-christian without having an absolute dogmatic position about the existence of independant cause of the world or not .We can't proove deism or atheism but the belief in the existence of a personificate unique god who will punish the bad and give justice to the just is undoubtly a "childish" (good or bad) need for human insecurity independantly of the proof of it's non existence. anyway any non-existence except the contradictory can't be prooven . you can also be opposed to a religion because you think a religion embodies values that is regressive for humanity indepandantly of the belief in a god or not .

Editing post #7600 by fg <p>you are quite an incult and ridiculous in your reasoning as usual. it is possible to be anti-christian without having an absolute dogmatic position about the existence of independant cause of the world or not .We can't proove deism or atheism but the belief in the existence of a personificate unique god who will punish the bad and give justice to the just is undoubtly a "childish" (good or bad) need for human insecurity independantly of the proof of it's non existence. anyway any non-existence except the contradictory can't be prooven . you can also be opposed to a religion because you think a religion embodies values that is regressive for humanity indepandantly of the belief in a god or not .</p>
Replying to post #7600 by fg

	Jacobus INFJ 4w5 EIE 2019/12/31 (Tue) 16:48:56 #7599
	General anti-theism is a dogmatic position in that there is no logical certainty of either the existence or non-existence of a God, therefore to place oneself firmly and immovably on one side or the other requires - whether rightfully or wrongfully - a belief that the person should believe or disbelieve regardless, usually on moral or epistemelogical grounds. Being anti-Christian ("anti-christianism", of course, is not a word in the English language) is a purely reactionary position, much like being explicitly opposed to any specific religion would be. It can only be based on either a) the belief that Christianity is a general force of evil that impedes reason, progress, or virtue; or b) that Christianity is an invasive ideology that infects the tribe. Neither are rational, and are in fact emotional and subjective in nature.

Editing post #7599 by Jacobus <p>General anti-theism is a dogmatic position in that there is no logical certainty of either the existence or non-existence of a God, therefore to place oneself firmly and immovably on one side or the other requires - whether rightfully or wrongfully - a belief that the person should believe or disbelieve regardless, usually on moral or epistemelogical grounds. Being anti-Christian ("anti-christianism", of course, is not a word in the English language) is a purely reactionary position, much like being explicitly opposed to any specific religion would be. It can only be based on either a) the belief that Christianity is a general force of evil that impedes reason, progress, or virtue; or b) that Christianity is an invasive ideology that infects the tribe. Neither are rational, and are in fact emotional and subjective in nature.</p>
Replying to post #7599 by Jacobus

date	username	vote
19/12/31 17:46	tch	INTJ
19/12/31 12:40	Jacobus	ISTJ
20/04/22 15:29	Tman	INTJ
19/05/24 20:16	jt	INTP
19/05/17 00:50	LadyX	INTJ
19/05/13 16:24	Teru Mikami	xSTJ
19/05/13 16:05	fg	INTJ

date	username	vote
19/12/31 17:46	tch	INTJ
19/12/31 07:48	Tman	INTJ
19/05/13 16:32	Phantom	INTJ
19/05/13 16:05	fg	INTJ

date	username	vote
19/12/31 12:40	Jacobus	cp6w5
19/05/17 00:50	LadyX	cp5w6
19/05/14 01:12	tman	cp5w6
19/05/13 16:05	fg	cp5w6

date	username	vote
20/01/09 16:43	Tman	so/sx
19/05/17 00:50	LadyX	sp/sx

date	username	vote
19/06/03 15:15	Tman	584

date	username	vote
20/02/26 10:26	Tman	LSI
19/05/13 16:58	fg	LSI

date	username	vote
19/12/31 12:40	Jacobus	LFVE
20/04/22 15:29	Tman	VLEF