Talk:Criticism of Christianity

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Criticism of Christianity article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6: 21 days

Religion: Interfaith Mid‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the scope of Interfaith work group, a work group which is currently considered to be inactive.

Christianity Top‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Atheism High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Atheism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of atheism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AtheismWikipedia:WikiProject AtheismTemplate:WikiProject AtheismAtheism articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

For more information and how you can help, click the [Show] link opposite:

If you would like to participate, you can edit this article and visit the project page.

Quick help

Recent activity

To do

Join WikiProject atheism and be bold.

Add a userbox to your page ({{User WikiProject Atheism}} or {{User WPA2}}) and attract potential members.
Help with articles.
See this month's adopt-an-article.
Help out with this to-do list.

Be consistent

Use a "standard" layout for atheism-related articles (see layout style, "The perfect article" and Featured articles).
Add Atheism info box to all atheism related talk pages (use {{WikiProject Atheism}} or see info box)
Ensure atheism-related articles are members of Atheism by checking whether [[Category:Atheism]] has been added to atheism-related articles – and, where it hasn't, adding it.

Maintenance, etc.

Find sources for all positions of an article (see Citing sources and atheism references).
Try to expand stubs. Ideas and theories about life, however, are prone to generating neologisms, so some stubs may be suitable for deletion (see deletion process).
Watch the list of atheism-related articles and add to accordingly.
Always write for an encyclopedia.

Articles to improve

Agnosticism

Create

Articles on notable atheists

Expand

an atheism stub

Immediate attention

State atheism needs a reassessment of its Importance level, as it has little to do with atheism and is instead an article about anti-theist/anti-religious actions of governments.
False choice into False dilemma: discuss whether you are for or against this merge here
Clarify references in Atheism using footnotes.
Secular movement defines it as a being restricted to America in the 21st century.

Philosophy: Religion Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophy of religion

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Antinomianism#Antinomianism in the New Testament|Antinomianism in the New Testament]] The anchor (#Antinomianism in the New Testament) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.
[[Antinomianism#Pauline passages opposing antinomianism|Pauline passages opposing antinomianism]] The anchor (#Pauline passages opposing antinomianism) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.
[[Pharisees#Pharisaic principles and values|Pharisees § Pharisaic principles and values]] The anchor (#Pharisaic principles and values) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Can common Christian defences to criticisms be on this page?

If they are not allowed, where should they go? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jarfuls of Tweed (talk • contribs) 10:36, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As long as they're respectful, well-thought and truly show God's nature then why not? You should tho, think twice before commenting, so that you don't lead people astray. And since Christianity is about love, you should be careful and respond lovingly. It's ok to disagree and have an unshaken opinion, but it's best if done nicely. Remember dear friends, we are all representing something other than ourselves: firstly God, then eachother. 77.247.88.228 (talk) 13:39, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question on Source - "Slavery in the Bible: Passages from the Christian Scriptures (New Testament)"

I've flagged this source for verification of reliability. It's been added to source the statements:

"The early Christian perspectives of slavery were formed in the contexts of Christianity's roots in Judaism, and as part of the wider culture of the Roman Empire. Both the Old and New Testaments recognize the institution of slavery. Historically, passages in the Old Testament of the Bible have been used as justification of the keeping of slaves, and for guidance in how it should be done."

The source is an essay on a web page that gives as it's source a talk delivered by a Rabbi in 1861.

"The following information source was used to prepare and update the above essay. The hyperlink is not necessarily still active today.

1. Rabbi M.J. Raphall, "The Bible View of Slavery," delivered in New York City, 1861. Available at: http://www.access.digex.net/~bdboyle/bible.slavery.txt"

I don't doubt that supporters of slavery have appealed to scripture over the centuries, as have opponents of slavery. However, this doesn't strike me as a particularly good source for the historical uses of scripture on this issue. Based on a quick read through it, the essay quotes Rabbi Raphall as saying that the Christian scriptures don't forbid slavery, and then pulls a series of scriptures and gives the author's own analysis how slavery is treated in the New Testament.

If we want to make the point that there was a historical pattern of slave owners appealing to scripture, there's got to be a better source.

It says in the Bible that God frees His people from slavery, through Moses. God created all people, everyone and everything. God is against slavery. He loves all people, and if not He wouldn't have made us, nor would He die for us. We were all created in His image. God doesn't hate us, only our sins. we are all sinful, which is why Jesus died for all of us. In fact, most of the points mentioned were valid, but if christians have done wrong hate the sins, not the people, and certainly not God and His Word, for they are right, just, good, holy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.247.88.228 (talk) 13:33, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is Christianity Polytheistic? Controversial Introduction Text

Someone added the term ‘polytheism’ along with other intellectual arguments against Christianity; which now reads: “... The Intellectual arguments against Christianity include the suppositions that it is a faith of violence, corruption, superstition, polytheism, bigotry, and sectarianism.” Not only it is exceedingly Offensive to polytheism and we polytheists, but it also lacks citations: what are the evidences that Christianity is polytheistic? Who, which ‘intellectual’ in particular argued it? Please immediately delete it as it suggests serious interference from Christians targeting Polytheists. And why should the page be unreasonably protected anyways? Please unlock it. Polytheist01 (talk) 10:47, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Polytheism is a typical criticism of Christianity levelled by Muslims. It's mentioned briefly (with citation) in the article body . PepperBeast (talk) 12:29, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. But is an accusation from the muslims, and perhaps the muslims alone, critical enough to be stressed in the first paragraph? If you ask any Buddhist, Taoist, or Shintoist, hardly anyone of them would agree to acknowledge Christianity as polytheistic. And Again, it really is very, Very offensive to put polytheism and commonly negatively perceived vocabularies in the same line. Try Put yourself in other's shoes for one second; how would a monotheist reader feel, when reading e.g. Criticism on Buddhism to encounter in the introduction: The intellectual arguments against Buddhism include the suppositions that it is faith of violence, ignorance, monotheism, bigotry, hypocrisy, nationalism and sectarianism? Please at least be more neutral and considerate with wording. Polytheist01 (talk) 20:48, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The polytheism (Shirk (Islam)) criticism is longstanding and significant, and amounts to an accusation from one monotheist religion that another monotheist religion is doing it wrong. Your claim of offensiveness is misplaced. PepperBeast (talk) 22:23, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Then use Shirk (Islam). Both to be more precise with your accusation- what exactly do you mean by 'polytheism', and to compensate for the complete lack of a Trinity section. Polytheist01 (talk) 12:25, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know who you think you're addressing. I'm not a significant contributor to this article. I added a link to shirk as well as to Christianity and Islam. If you have something to contribute regarding the trinity, that's great, but Trinitarianism is actually a core belief of a large majority of Christians, so just sticking the word in the lede is meaningless. PepperBeast (talk) 16:34, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apart from the trinity, there is criticism of Christianity for being polytheistic, rather than monotheistic as it claims to be, because of the tradition in some Christian denominations (including the largest one) of praying to saints and asking them to intercede in earthly matters. I'm not inclined to work on this article myself, but maybe someone could find the sources to confirm this and include it in the article. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:45, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Of course. saints and local saints attributed with traits normally associated with earlier Ethnic Gods and Goddesses when they heavily sanctioned what they call 'pagan' - the Indigenous and Classical religions. Personally could not care less about the trinity but a (sub-)section on Criticism from e.g. The Stoics such as Emperor Marcus Aurelius should be written as they are amongst the most skeptical towards the christians, referring to them as the 'dramatic ones'. Polytheist01 (talk) 10:53, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No dears, it is not! The concept of the trinity is really complex, and not really mentioned as much, but: The Father (Jehovah) is God, The Son (Jesus) is God and The Holy Spirit is also God, the Father is not the Son nor The Holy Spirit and so on. Although they are 3 distinct beings, they are One. I know it's hard and confusing, but God has said that we aren't meant to know everything, because only God is all-knowing, and God doesn't need to operate in human ways. For His ways are Higher then ours. He only revealed what we need to know. Hope that helped! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.247.88.228 (talk) 13:48, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"I know it's hard and confusing" It is neither hard, nor confusing. It is the old pagan concept of the triple deity: "a deity with three apparent forms that function as a singular whole. Such deities may sometimes be referred to as threefold, tripled, triplicate, tripartite, triune, triadic, or as a trinity. The number three has a long history of mythical associations and triple deities are common throughout world mythology. Carl Jung considered the arrangement of deities into triplets an archetype in the history of religion." Dimadick (talk) 19:18, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

🙄 —DIYeditor (talk) 20:00, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Origins" section.

The section as it focuses on the historicity of Jesus, which is more relevant to 'Christ myth theory' or 'Criticism of Jesus' rather than a broad critique of Christianity. This content is not directly related to general criticisms of Christianity as a religion. I’m leaning towards excluding it. StarkReport (talk) 08:31, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]