think the reason for that is fairly simple: Christianity (and probably most religions) means something different for each and every person. For a complete outsider, the only solid definition of Christianity is the "I read the bible and believe all of it" one, since no one has any way of knowing what parts any one individual believes.
Maybe not even that. There are probabl enough people out there (Especially in Japan.) that know little enough to just go 'Christ, cross, bible thing.' and that's it.
The Bible contradicts itself horribly (being written by many different people) and advocates some pretty disturbing, rash things; This leads to accusations based on the assumption that anyone claiming to be a Christian literally believes all of the Bible, which leads to defensiveness on the part of the person claiming to be a Christian, because no one in our society likes to be painted as a negative stereotype.
This itself is an outsider view, most Christians will tell you that the bible does not contradict itself at all. (And that YOU my friend do your evolution, it's random, but you say it's NOT just random? Make up your mind!)
Problems often arise in interpretation. Is God ok with gays? What about the trinity? Do we keep he sabbath holy? A lot of sects and even entire religions are based on 'Those guys make no sense, we're based on solid logic!'
And there's no better way to annoy people than to take something from the bible and not even think about how it might make sense.
As an example saying 'Genesis contradicts itself about the order of creation' i about the same as 'Darwin recanted on his deathebed and admitted evolution was just speculation' anyone who knows anything about that field can immediately spot the wrongness.
But instead of listening to the other side, the argument is often immediately dismissed as just being a stupid excuse. (Oh one was the actual order the other was focused around Man's creation... riiiight. Ah there's no proof of that and his family denied it, suuuure.) So you have two groups of people who as far as they can see are obviously right, while their opponents are obviously wrong, so wrong only an idiot would believe them, and they're too dumb to even admit it!
You now have (at least) two pissed off people who are both completely mistaken about what the other person is thinking.
It would save everyone a lot of hate and confusion if someone could just re-edit the bible for the 21st century.
Good idea, first we'll cut out all that God stuff, nobody believes in that anymore. Also the miracles are totally unrealistic...
But seriously? People have. In many different ways. There are bibles in basic english, the kiwi bible, bible concordances, it can still be a struggle to be informed about something. (Wait... so why didn't the farmer just pull out the weeds and leave the wheat? *I* can weed a garden surely!)
Also, some certain harsh Hebrew laws are included in the Old Testament - to understand the meaning of the New Testament, one needs to have at least a passing understanding of Rabbinic Judaism (along with the Messianic prophecy that came along with it).
And the culture at the time. People are often shocked about the 'You rape a woman, you marry her' law until they find out that the usual procedure was 'You get off scott free! The women is kicked out and has to become a whore!' Old testament times were not at all nice, and applying modern standards to them causes a lot of headaches.
When you get down to it, the Bible is a collection of writings that one does not have to take literally, or even at all true. Some Christians just discount the Old Testament as primarily Jewish mythology (or, at the very least, a history book not really inspired by God). There's no reason some couldn't do the same to, for example, Paul, some of whose raging (e.g. against homosexuals) seems distinctly cultural, or to John, whose Book of Revelation is simply weird.
Indeed, one of the big splitters between denominations. America will tell you 'It's all true darnit!' while many in Europe say 'It's got a lot of metaphor and poetry in it'
I take the stance that if God is who He is, then the bible is divine and thus all true, if not literally true. (Jesus is the way, not a footpath or road map. He is the son of man, but Joseph didn't give birth.)
Another big splitter is, if you're going to discount stuff, you'll usually do it the way you like. (I like gays, all that bashing is nonsense; I hate liberals I'll just ignore that stuff about helping others.) Conservapedia's bible project is an extreme example of this, the bible is apparently filled with liberal bias and needs to be edited. It'll finally say what God 8really* meant, that heaven is republican. (And not liberal republican either!)
I know a few "Christians" who don't believe in the divinity of Christ. Ironically they all go to church regularly. When asked "what makes you a Christian?", one of them told me "because I say I am." The problem with this is that Christianity claims to help people and solve problems, but if your doctor practiced medicine without a diploma he'd be put in prison.
This is why LL hates mainstream churches. She dislikes being able to say you're something 'just because' without any real effort of life change.
The fact that one does not have to take the bible literally is irrelevant, because many people do, and I have never once heard a pastor mention during a service that "none of this stuff actually happened", so it's certainly encouraged.
I have. Though I imagine it's not popular in American influenced countries. Did you know at one time there was the idea that the 'rapture' had already happened? (Roughly speaking.)
Why is that necessary? The Old Testament does provide backstory for the New Testament, but it's hardly necessary for most Christians. Jesus lived in an oppressive theocracy that tried to shut him up, and that's most of what you need to know.
Most damningly, Christians totally ignore most, if not all Jewish laws, including the Ten Commandments.
He also quoted it whenever he could. Often he said 'It is written' or 'Is it not written?' And it is full of good stuff too, the book of proverbs has some gems, even if they are the kind of stuff that makes perfect sense. (Money doesn't buy you happiness.) but nobody follows anyway. For spiritual people I imagine they can pull all sorts of stuff out of it about the nature of God and suchlike. At the very least I learned from it that people suck and can be real mean sometimes.
Jesus liberally interpreted the laws as he saw fit. While I think we can agree that his interpretations made more sense than the fairly strict laws of the time, in Mark 2:23-28 he presumes to reinterpret the third commandment, which (even in the current bible) very strictly states that no work shall be done on the sabbath. However, Matthew 5:17 sees Jesus claiming that he has not come to destroy the law, even though he re-interpreted and broke it constantly.
The laws already had been reinterpreted from when they were written, it was not legal for a doctor to save someone on the sabbath day to some people.(And of course, stick gathering... heinous!) What most people Ive talked to argue is that Jesus followed the spirit of the law, not the letter. (The sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath = Saturday was supposed to be a day of scripture reading and introspection that you didn't waste working, but geez, cut people some slack, its for their good, not their limitation!)
He also said basically 'I'm here, new covenant, old one not needed anymore. Don't obey all those little nitpicky laws, just be *good* (Murder, not good. Lying, not good, you get the idea, be good and you'll naturally fufill all those laws.)
That's another way of looking at it: you are whatever you claim you are. The point is that your criterion is too strict either way: a very reasonable Christian view rejects the OT as mythology, and I'm sure one could also reasonably reject Paul and Relevation, for instance.
*Snerk!* Bahahahahaaaa!
'Reasonable'? Some would say the only reasonable option would be total rejection. What is reasonable depends on the belief of the person. I've heard often that evolution is just chance and only a moron would think it could magically come up with what we see around us.
And they're not deluded, they believe this, with the same conviction that you don't. That feeling you have (Right now?) that you are so obviously right, it makes so much sense, everything backs 8you* up? They have that too. As I've said, if God is true, all of the bible is true, that's logic. (I doubt a God who is so powerful and did all that stuff would let people write stuff down that was all lies.) I don't do half and halfs, either there was a flood and Eden or there wasn't, it's either history or its a story. I fail to see logic in God letting some parts be true and having the rest shoved in there (WHY? Because it made good reading?)
From my experience working in the church, it seemed more like "appeasing the whole audience" rather than appealing to them, because it looked almost like motivated members of the congregation acted as a union, eventually forcing the pastor out of his/her job if he/she didn't preach what they wanted to hear.
It's called groupthink, and everyone does it. Remember the banks? The 'We don't need anyone to monitor us, we're all doing fine and all of us agree no exceptions'? The dot com boom, various political parties and all the rest? Once you get a group there is a group mind. And it is hard to change.
Edit: this really has nothing to do with theology, but it really bothered me that the upper branches of the church hierarchy trusted random loud-mouthed jerks more than trained pastors who had actually read the bible.
This has nothing to do with the topic, but it really bothers me that society will pick a leader based on birth certificates and seeing russia from their house rather than a demonstration of understanding issues and being able to handle the position. Or that people will listen to a loudmouth saying 'It's a conspiracy! The microwave companies hid the evidence and bribed people' rather than the scientific consensus about anything at all.
The problem is, most Christians I've known never read or studied the bible outside of church (if even there), which made it impossible to understand what they really believed.
Say this to LL, if you do it right she'll start foaming at the mouth.
In our society, people rarely seem to question the story of Moses and how he led the Jews out of Egypt, but there is no archaeological evidence to support that story.
Indeed, but the bible's been surprisingly right before. You never know. (Though absence of evidence IS evidence of absence and don't let anyone tell you otherwise!)
What you really need, not what you think you ought to want.
).
