Why do some Christian people say this?

Question

Why do some Christian people (some, not all, so please no hate mail) call non-believers dumb or stupid or ignorant. I don't get it. Your info please.

Some of you people who say that non-believers call believers down are absolutely right. I was gonna put that down but think of it at the time. I just wish we could all get along.

I personally would never call a believer dumb or say any other insultory comments. In my opinion, those who feel the need to ridicule other people's personal beliefs should themselves be insulted. Peace!

Answer 1

I really don't think a "true" Christian would ever call a non-believer dumb, stupid or ignorant.
I am a Christian and I would not do that
I don't get it either except to say we are to love all people...hate the sin, but love the person to the best of our ability
For someone to call anyone those or any name would say to me maybe they are not where they need to be in their walk with God yet.
We are all on a journey to be more "Christ like"...it is a continual growth process...maybe these people have not grown that much yet.

closest i can come

be cool...

Answer 2

Narrow, shallow thinking. It seems many people take the road to insult and put down anyone who disagrees with their beliefs and think in some twisted way that that will either make the person turn from their own beliefs or that it just makes them feel better and bigger to put someone down...it goes for both sides in your question.

Answer 3

A Christian arrives at his/her faith via Isaiah 1:18, usually via heavy soul-searching and much pain. If the Spirit of God is in a person, and that person is yielding to the Spirit, love and acceptance is the fruit of their conversation.

I'll apologize on behalf of these people, as a Christian. If anyone out there has been hurt by a Christian, or someone representing themselves as a Christian, I'm very sorry.

Now, if you have chosen to bait a Christian into lashing out in anger or pain, you don't have my apology...you have my prayers.

Answer 4

There are some subtleties at work here that seem to escape the notice of most people. They have to do with the nature of 'belief'.

A rational person might say "I believe in the Big Bang." A religious person might say "I believe in creation, as described in Genesis." But these statements are not even remotely similar, with respect to what is meant by the word 'believe'.

For the rational person, the statement of 'belief' in the Big Bang means that they understand that the concept provides a scientifically and mathematically consistent explanation, congruent with the evidence, which accounts for the evolution of the universe from a fraction of a second after the initiating event, up until the present. When the 'inflationary model' came to the fore, rational people said "Well, good... that clears up a few questions and makes things even more coherent." NOBODY threw up their arms and wailed "Oh, no... oh, no... ain't so... ain't so... the Big Bang is the inerrant truth... not this ridiculous, atheistic 'inflationary' model."

See... when we say "I believe in the Big Bang", we don't really mean the same thing as the religious person means when he says "I believe in creation, as described in Genesis," or "I believe in God." Our 'belief' in the Big Bang (or anything else) isn't really a 'belief'... it is more properly a 'paradigm'... a useful way of looking at something, or thinking about something. If additional information is uncovered that adds to the conceptual model, that is a good thing... not a disaster. If part of the conceptual model is discovered to be incorrect, and must be tossed in the trash and replaced with something completely different... that is also a good thing... not the end of the world as we know it. And often, no matter how highly confident we may be of the accuracy or completeness of a particular paradigm, we may have reason to apply a DIFFERENT paradigm to the same thing, in an effort to tease out new insights; for example, we might want to contemplate the potential implications of a change to a theory from the perspective of the Tao Te Ching, the Gaia hypothesis, or ecological homeostasis. We KNOW that all theories are approximations... and that is OK. We KNOW that we don't have all the answers... and that is OK, too. There is nothing wrong with saying "We don't know... yet; but we're working on it."

But these modes of thinking, perceiving, contemplating and understanding are utterly alien to the 'religious' mind. For the religious mind, a 'belief' is not a paradigm... not a useful way of thinking about something... it is an internalized conviction that one knows the absolute 'truth' pertaining to some aspect of existence and/or fundamental reality. 'Beliefs' are one of the key interpretive component filters of the religious person's 'self-description'... a part of what DEFINES them as a person... the very thing that creates their world-view... an underpinning of their 'subjective reality'. Any challenge to one of these internalized 'beliefs' is perceived and interpreted as a vital threat... an attack upon the 'self-description'... and an assault upon their subjective reality.

And here is the key difference: When there is a change in one of the paradigms dealing with a scientific concept, or a new insight into the workings of the universe, to the 'rational' person it merely constitutes an interesting new piece of knowledge and understanding... a new insight. However, if that same new insight, or piece of information (a feature of the universe, for example) seems to threaten a tenet of Christianity, everybody goes to battle stations, goes into 'damage control' mode... for fear that the whole edifice will come crashing down. And, ultimately, it will.

So, when a fundie disparages evolution, for example, it really has nothing to do with a genuine, intellectual dispute regarding scientific details... they are generally scientifically illiterate, anyway. Any 'scientific' arguments that they present are inevitably not even understood... they are just lifted from the pre-packaged lies and misrepresentations that are found on dozens of 'Liars for Jesus' (LFJ) web sites, and parroted. They are in a battle. They are trying to sink science before science sinks them. They are desperate... and science is (mostly, and unfortunately) oblivious to the fact that they are even in a fight, and that somebody is trying to sink them. They are just blithely bopping along, doing what science does... figuring out how nature works.

No... none of this has anything to do with a mere disagreement pertaining to evidence and understanding. It has to do with minds that deal with fundamental issues in an entirely different way. It has to do with a flexible, open-minded, intellectually honest (willing to question and doubt one's own presumptions) curiosity about the universe, contending with a rigid, unyielding world-view that depends from a certainty that certain delusional faith-based (willful ignorance and magical, wishful thinking) 'beliefs' represent the absolute 'truth' of reality.

We might as well be talking to an alien species, from a distant planet.

When the religious enter a venue like this one, they are (generally) NOT seeking answers, or new information... these might cause them to QUESTION their beliefs, or might put their beliefs at risk. No... they are seeking VALIDATION... of their beliefs, and hence, of their self-description.

Answer 5

Because some Christians generalize and like to insult people. The same could be said of the other side as well.

Answer 6

it happens on both sides of the fence. Non believers calling believers dumb and vise versa. But if they really are christian they should not be calling any one names and condemning any one for their beliefs. That does not make then Christians just hypocrites.

Answer 7

I personally don't do that. But, I have seen a lot of atheist calling Christians dumb or stupid or ignorant for being believer. That don't justify or make it right for Christians to do the same because the bible says in Romans 12:14 "Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse." and Romans 12:19 "Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay,"[d]says the Lord."

Answer 8

It is ignorant to call any religion stupid I disagree with all religion but I am a Christian . In Answer to your question the bible refers to the Light & the Dark having no comunion, this is representitive of the believer and the non believer . those who do not believe cannot understand Faith, and never will.

Answer 9

Name calling never helped or solved anything.

I'm sorry that some people who claim to follow Christ behave in this way. It is wrong and they are just exhibiting their sinful nature.

Keep in mind that people who are Christians are a work in progress. Maturity and transformation take time, and perfection will only be achieved when we are in heaven.

That's why Christ had to die on a cross.

Answer 10

I would say from my observations here that it is the other way around... it is usualy the Christian bashers who use those phrases, and worse, against the Christians... BTW... if someone is using those terms in a clearly derisve way...they are not realy Christians.... no one of the True Christian Faith would use hate speach against any one...

Yes...I have wised off at some smart a*s from time to time...even we Christians can get frustrated... but to see one claiming to be and using that speach repeatedly is an indication they are not what they claim to be...