Is it just me, or do people make a lot of mistaken assumptions without even realizing it?
For instance, as you've probably noticed by now, I can get rather harsh in my criticism. The interesting thing is that, almost invariably, when I unleash my inner Yeti on some unsuspecting schmuck in a semi-public forum, someone will speak up to remind me that I'm an ordained minister. When I ask exactly what they're getting at, they finally get around to saying that ministers shouldn't be getting harsh - it's not Christ-like.
There are three mistaken assumptions there. First, they're assuming that I took some sort of oath binding me to a code of behavior when I was ordained. Second, they're assuming that I was ordained into a Christian church and therefore give a rat's ass about being Christ-like. Finally, they assume that Christ was some meek, politically correct guy who went around politely not offending people and got killed for it. All three assumptions are demonstrably wrong.
First, I was not given any tests whatsoever when I was ordained, nor did I swear to uphold any particular code of behavior. I was ordained online by the Universal Life Church, and they have a policy of ordaining anyone who asks. In fact, the main reason I started using the title was to highlight that anyone - even a self-proclaimed agnostic with atheistic tendencies - can become ordained and get the nice little goodies that go with it. In other words, it's a social statement, not a proclamation of faith. This also explains the second point; while ULC uses some Christan sound-bites, they're not exactly what you could call a typical Christian church. (For one thing, they don't get their panties in a wad over tiny issues of doctrine....) I'm actually considering joining the Church of the SubGenius at some point; their code of behaviour aligns quite nicely with my own beliefs, and they still ordain people as ministers with the "Reverend" title.
This leaves one last assumption to debunk: that being harsh is not Christ-like. Let's not mince words here; Jesus was a counter-culture revolutionary who posed enough of a threat to the establishment of his day that they killed him for it. Consider Matthew 23:29-33 for an example of Jesus being harsh and undeniably politically incorrect:
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, and say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
Of course, if you can somehow consider calling people a "generation of vipers" political correctness, then perhaps a reminder of Jesus's actions in the temple when he meekly informed the moneychangers that they shouldn't be there will illustrate the point better. The fact is, as far as his actions and motives are recorded in the Bible, Jesus came to Earth for the express purpose of shaking things up. Perhaps those who consider me out of line should reflect on how they'd treat someone who performed similar stunts today. Sticking up for what he believed in is what made Jesus famous; how can I be other than Christ-like in doing the same?
Incidentally, for the curious, I do think Jesus had a lot of good ideas. It's just when people make him out to be the Son of God that I start to disagree. (And I'm not the only one. Ever heard of the Jefferson Bible, in which Thomas Jefferson took great care to separate Jesus's ethics from the religion that now surrounds them?)
The point here is simple. Before you assume something, think about it. Is it really a valid assumption, something that is actually true, or is it only something you wish were true? Check your facts and your debate skills will improve dramatically, as will your ability to deal with offensive heathens like myself. Of course, I would be remiss if I failed to inform you of the dangers of this course; knowledge is a blade which can twist in your hand and sunder something you hold dear. In fact, the one single event that converted me from Christianity was a school course which required me to examine the Bible with a critical eye.
In other words, knowledge is often rewarding, but ignorance can be bliss if you can't handle the truth.