If Christianity is the Truth, why do Christians avoid criticism?

I have noticed this a lot on YouTube.  Christian videos and Christian commenters have a strong tendency to not allow comments from others about their material and words.  They seek to control criticism rather than learn from it.  I have also seen this from conspiracy theorists who don’t want their beliefs questioned.

On the flip side, I have yet to see this from anyone who approaches information from a more scientific viewpoint.  In fact, in the search for greater understanding, questioning is not only encouraged, it is how we come to learn new things.  It is how we further understand what really is the truth.

Suppressing criticism is a demonstration of pride of belief.

What does the Bible say of this?

“The LORD detests the proud; they will surely be punished.” ~ Proverbs 16:5 NLT

It seems that God is on the side of science and questioning.  Isn’t the idea of Christianity to avoid God’s punishment?

This entry was posted in Law, Politics and Control and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to If Christianity is the Truth, why do Christians avoid criticism?

  1. Soduhson says:

    Sometimes (emphasis on sometimes) it’s not about avoiding criticism, but avoiding “irrelevant” criticism. Occasionally a specific theological point is being argued (predestination or the nature of the trinity for example), and a skeptic will distract the discussion into a Evolution vs. Creationism debate or something like “Can God create a rock so heavy not even he can lift it”. Not saying that creationism debates aren’t important, but it’s not what the video or post is about. To avoid the situation they eliminate comments altogether. Note that they are missing out on constructive criticism and complements as well.

    • jasonjshaw says:

      My concern though is that this seems to be a very one-sided thing. The instance that inspired me to write about this was actually someone questioning a video on evolution, in the form of a question, but with replies turned off. It does not shine a positive light on the person utilizing such a method. Especially as it is a favourite move utilized by shady politicians.

      Basically, it is commonly something that is utilized by someone with an agenda rather than someone who cares about the truth.

      • Soduhson says:

        Well, with Christianity there’s always more than just two sides to every story. Especially with evolution and creationism.

        Within Christianity you have:

        1.Young Earth Creationism (one extreme)

        2. Old Earth Creationism

        3. Intelligent Design

        4. Theistic Evolution

        5. Deistic Evolution (opposite extreme)

        Most Christians do believe they have the truth, and (unless they somehow benefit from it like those $1000 “healings”) have good (or at least benign) intentions; by not allowing comments they are essentially saying “I have nothing to prove” or “God has spoken”. However this is even problematic to other believers.

      • jasonjshaw says:

        For sure, it is problematic as it is prideful. It seems to be most evident in the Young Earth Creation side of things, but it signifies a problem wherever it is utilized extensively.

    • Arkenaten says:

      I consider the entirety of religion is irrelevant so what s the point of censoring any comments on the issue?
      If what yo belief is fact and truth then it will be revealed and those who state it is just so much hokum will very quickly make fools of themselves.

      • Soduhson says:

        “I consider the entirety of religion irrelevant”

        Case and point, not every religion based video is about convincing skeptics. People thinking that is why comments get blocked.

      • jasonjshaw says:

        If religion was a hobby group that doesn’t want to deal with outsider ridicule, I would be more understanding of comment blocking of videos. When it is a claim to the truth of existence of everyone but is acting like a closed group, that is where I see a conflict of interest.

      • Soduhson says:

        But if religion were irrelevant to a skeptic the alleged conflict of interest would be irrelevant as well. It becomes a bile fascination for the nonbeliever to engage in such discussion. Religious (particularly extremist) videos tend to be the one’s which block comments but it’s by no means an exclusive phenomenon. Nor is the avoidance of irrelevant discussion exclusive to religion. Psychology comes to mind first as an area of study where many people see the entire subject matter as irrelevant and those people are blocked from formal discussion forums without specific invitations or qualifications (especially at universities).

        With Christianity in particular, many believers (myself included) are concerned with getting our own ideological house in order, not just evangelizing/defending the faith by any means necessary.

      • jasonjshaw says:

        If it is in discussing internal religious understandings, alright, but for those promoting outwardly their agenda while disallowing criticism (which has been the case more often than not from what I’ve seen) then it is a problem.

      • Arkenaten says:

        If one wishes to present a case for ”your” religion then present one based on fact and integrity – something generally entirely lacking in the arguments of proponents, especially where proselytizing such religion is concerned.
        Unless you know otherwise there is not a single major religion that I can think of that is based on one scrap of factual historical evidence for its claims.

      • Soduhson says:

        Like I said, it’s not about always about convincing skeptics (ie: you). Now if Jason wants to let his blog post become a “drop everything and convince Arkenaten” discussion, that’s his prerogative. I learned that it’s not worth the headache. You basically get a Ehrman vs. Craig style stalemate. Same credentials, same information, opposite viewpoints. It devolves into an ideological battle of attrition.

      • Arkenaten says:

        I believe you are still missing the point so let me try to explain in terms you may find easier to understand.
        I don’t care what religious idiots believe…and they are all idiots if they attach serious life governing decisions to the supernatural especially when so much evidence is available to help them get over this nonsense once and for all.
        No. Debates, here on blogland and in the theater of Real Life, are largely for entertainment value and very few religious folk have changed their minds on the say so of the non-religious, and rightly so as we are all entitled to believe what we like…as ADULTS. Enlightenment comes from within, when the truth can no longer be denied: Religion is a crock.

        The issue is that religious plonkers like Ken Ham, WLC and their ilk, & even mainstream religion is guilty of – is the practice of proselytization ; indoctrinating children.
        This is what should be looked at and some for of legislation brought to bear against such abuse.

        I sincerely hope the point is now clear?

      • Soduhson says:

        “I don’t care what religious idiots believe”

        Apparently you do, otherwise this conversation would have ended sometime ago. I’ll let you have the last word, which I presume you want.

      • Arkenaten says:

        As Deep Purple sang..”..and fools die laughing still.”

        What a chump you truly are.
        Happy now? Super….

  2. Howie says:

    I usually like to give the benefit of the doubt and I can’t say I’ve done any studies on this, but I think that in general you are correct here. I have had several of my very tame but slightly opposing comments never see the light of day on several Christian blogs. Certainly not all Christian blogs are this way for sure, and I’m sure some arrogant skeptics run the show that way also but again in general skeptic sites do seem to be more open to opposing viewpoints than Christian ones. I think part of this is because Christians (especially conservative ones) have a message they want others to hear that they feel is so incredibly important and they don’t want the people they are witnessing to to be tainted by opposing viewpoints which they deem to be evil. But the sad part is that they don’t see the inconsistency of the fact that they often adjure people of other faiths and worldviews to open their mind to other views (hint hint – only one other view) and to follow the evidence wherever it may lead.

Leave a Reply to Soduhson Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s