Is an uneducated Christian a poor representative for Christianity?

Question

I have to tell you, when someone asks a question like this: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Akqd.XTmYJWD3sGpnFzVJKTd7BR.?qid=20070820084131AAP9n9a
It only serves to eliminate all possibility of me taking you and your religion seriously.

Clearly this person has no comprehension of evolutionary theory. Whether you agree with evolution or not, you should at least equip yourself with a basic understanding of how it's supposed to work.

I know there are some educated Christians out there who know what I'm talking about. Do you have no interest in educating your Christian brothers and sisters? Or are you ok with allowing them to make the rest of you look stupid?

Answer 1

who says they are representatives of Christianity? Bible-fundamentalists are the most embarrassing self-declared representatives of Christianity. even if you try to educate them, you will only end up disappointed, because they are very good in not hearing what they don't want to hear.

Answer 2

Bible thumping fascists would probably not recognize Christ if he was standing in front of them. At some point they'd probably conclude from his dark features and strange language that he was a terrorist unless he healed their rabid ignorance before they said too much.

As for making me look stupid I can't help what other people do. I'm not Catholic for example but I have a Catholic friend who says some of the stupidest things like;

"Well the reason that Muslims can't control their fundamentalists is because their religion isn't centralized like Christianity is under the Pope."

What utter ignorance my friend says these stupid things to me and each time I have remind him that Protestants could care less what the Pope says and there are some groups of protestants that don't even consider the Pope a Christian.

However not all Catholics feel like this and live in harmony with everyone else. There are always crazy people though in any group that think they have all the answers. Mostly the nutters are just looking for control. I just ignore them.

Having said all of that only a gibbering cretin would not accept the simple fact of evolution. As an American I am disgusted that my tax dollars would pay for teaching anything else.

Answer 3

yes and no .......poor representative? No
Typical......yes
On the other hand you can't hypnotise a dumb animal.so really dense people are probably safe from god-botherers

I agree with you entirely and the truth is if you did drop the pc enough times it is inevitable that it would at some point become operable,although evolving into a different brand is just plain silly,which is the laughable part of this dim-wits reasoning
It must be strange living in the 21st century in a modern (so called) nation where rational people (?) have the power to ban teaching scientific theory and insist that children believe in ghosts and people possessed by swine(legion)
Fight the good fight

Answer 4

Please don't compare apples to oranges.



The origin of life is unknown to science.
The origin of the main organic types and their principal subdivisions are likewise unknown to science.
There is no evidence in favour of an ascending evolution of organic forms.
There is no trace of even a merely probable argument in favour of the animal origin of man. The earliest human fossils and the most ancient traces of culture refer to a true Homo sapiens as we know him today.
Most of the so-called systematic species and genera were certainly not created as such, but originated by a process of either gradual or saltatory evolution. Changes which extend beyond the range of variation observed in the human species have thus far not been strictly demonstrated, either experimentally or historically.
There is very little known as to the causes of evolution. The greatest difficulty is to explain the origin and constancy of "new" characters and the teleology of the process. Darwin's "natural selection" is a negative factor only. The moulding influence of the environment cannot be doubted; but at present we are unable to ascertain how far that influence may extend. Lamarck's "inheritance of acquired characters" is not yet exactly proved, nor is it evident that really new forms can arise by "mutation". In our opinion the principle of "Mendelian segregation", together with Darwin's natural selection and the moulding influence of environment, will probably be some of the chief constituents of future evolutionary theories.

Answer 5

I personally, would like to see everyone in the world capable of actually explaining their positions and why they hold such things. However, very few people, and I mean few, actually are able to articulate their positions, much less give a valid reason why they are so. It is sad, I agree, but at the same time, everyone is responsible for how much they choose to be a self-educator.

Answer 6

God help me, this is what I try to do! Education on what other people believe is as important to evangelism as knowing what you yourself believe!

I study, as much as I am able, current scientific theory on the origins of life and of the universe (as well as what Muslims and Buddhists think about it).

Ignorant people often have the loudest, most opinionated mouths. I apologize, as much as I am able, on behalf of my Christian brothers and sisters for ignorant comments like the one you cited.

I do, however, need to mention that ignorance is not solely the burden of the religious. Many atheists present equally as ignorant arguements about religions and the divine as this one does about evolution. We could all stand to understand each other better.

Answer 7

An unloving, self-righteous, judgmental Christian is a poor representative for Christianity.

That may or may not have anything to do with education, with this exception: Christians who are "educated" to believe the blather that Paul made up about Jesus are more likely to be unloving, self-righteous, and judgmental, as are those who are "educated" to believe that anything out of the Hebrew Scriptures gives them justification for BEING unloving, self-righteous, and judgmental.

Answer 8

I've met many christian "bible thumpers" who have clearly never actually read the bible. They argue based on what they've been told is written there, instead of what they've read there themselves, and are incredibly surprised when I show them the acual passages that I'm referring to.

That's not to say that all christians are uneducated, or that all pagans are uneducated, or that all muslims are uneducated, etc... but they are the ones who usually shout the loudest and stand out the most.

Answer 9

Given the Bible I'm not sure what a "good" representative of Christianity would look like.

I have meet a couple of Christians that I have found to be quite humane but the majority of them have less than sterling characters.

Answer 10

It is true that many people mis-represent Christians, on television and in protest. (in the Bible , Jesus didn't come to condemn the world, but save it, while many people claiming to be Christians condemn the people and do the opposite of heir beliefs) And unfortunately, the educated people don't always have the opportunity to educate people who don't want to listen.