How can people see themselves as "good Christians" and make comments like "All liberals are going to hell"?

A total lack of any sense of irony.

And if people are offended by the question, or their immediate reaction is "they don't say that!" just look on this board and the politics board to see several hundred examples of this everyday.

But the right wingers and the Christians are not the only guilty parties, it is a two way street with a few closed minded zealots in both lanes.

It is just people flaming for the sense of flaming, it is wholly nonconstructive, and impedes any sort of meaningful dialogue about religion or politics. Quite a shame really.

The term "christian" has become a very misused descriptor. As followers of christ we should be experiencing the "born again" experience daily. It is a journey, not an event. Dying to ones self takes time and effort. It requires integrity and honesty. But also remember that because it is a journey different people are at different places in their journey..some are wiser and have more discernment than others...we are an imperfect people...hence the sacrifice of Jesus by our Heavenly Father for our Salvation.

Ignorance. Why is it that some "Christians" have a less-than-Christ-like attitude toward Catholics, Jews, Mormons, Muslims, etc? Christ taught that the nets would be thrown into the water and all types would be drawn in. Unfortunately there are some very hateful people in Christianity. This does not mean that as a religion it is hopeless.

Well, obviously they are not walking in the Spirit of God- or else they would feel conviction when saying that and meaning it. No one should make harsh comments like that. We are to share the truth in love with others. Of course there is a Heaven and a hell but we need to share the gospel of Jesus Christ just as it is- and with love and concern for other people....not go around condemning the world, that is NOT our position- and it brings on self righteousness and arrogance. So if anyone says these things, they need to humble themselves before God and ask Him to show them how to share the truth in love....just as Jesus did- using God's law, and still doing this out of love for others..to show people they have sin, and need Him.

And this was written to believers:

Ephesians 4:15

Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ,

They can say that all they want - but ask them if it is up to them or God who gets into heaven. People are people - there are good Christians and bad ones, just as there are good people and bad people - not all Muslims are terrorists, and not all Christians are saintly people. Personally, I would either ignore them or laugh at them. And the saying is "Judge not lest ye be judged". I also wonder... what if the liberal... is a Christian?

You are correct that Jesus said to judge not or you will be judged by the same standards. Unfortunately, some juvenile Christians haven't progessed past the point of feeling superior because of God's gift to them and they fail to comprehend their distortion of the Christian faith. Putting labels on people and attempting to become like God (who is the only One qualified to judge) in not in accordance with the faith that they profess.

Stereotypes...judging others by looking on their physical appearances and not knowing them. I'm a catholic and whoever uses their religion in vain (the same as using God'd name in vain) then he is not a true christian follower for he isn't wise enough to know what's right and wrong. Do not believe in what they say because they might be lying or in it for 2 points...

How can they do that? It's in their very definition of being a "good Christian". There is a very odd and violently conservative version of Christianity that is best represented by people like James Dobson.

To uderstand it, you have to "get" their idea of moral Christianity.

I recommend getting the book "Don't Think of an Elephant" for insignt into this. Here's some exerpts from that book, which may help:

This is how Lakoff defines the conservative "morality" of peole who think that liberals are horrible and misguided people:

"The world is a dangerous place, and it always will be, because there is evil out there in the world. The world is also difficult because it is competitive. There will always be winners and losers. There is an absolute right and an absolute wrong. Children are born bad, in the sense that they just want to do what feels good, not what is right. Therefore, they have to be made good.

What is needed in this kind of a world is a strong, strict father who can:

* Protect the family in the dangerous world,

* Support the family in the difficult world, and

* Teach his children right from wrong.

What is required of the child is obedience, because the strict father is a moral authority who knows right from wrong. It is further assumed that the only way to teach kids obedience-that is, right from wrong- is through punishment, painful punishment, when they do wrong. This includes hitting them, and some authors on conservative child rearing recommend sticks, belts, and wooden paddles on the bare bottom. Some authors suggest this start at birth, but Dobson is more liberal. "There is no excuse for spanking babies younger than fifteen or eighteen months of age" (Dobson, The New Dare to Discipline, 65).

The rationale behind physical punishment is this: When children do something wrong, if they are physically disciplined they learn not to do it again. That means that they will develop internal discipline to keep themselves from doing wrong, so that in the future they will be obedient and act morally. Without such punishment, the world will go to hell. There will be no morality.

Such internal discipline has a secondary effect. It is what is required for success in the difficult, competitive world. That is, if people are disciplined and pursue their self-interest in this land of opportunity, they will become prosperous and self-reliant. Thus, the strict father model links morality with prosperity. The same discipline you need to be moral is what allows you to prosper. The link is the pursuit of self-interest.

Given opportunity and discipline, pursuing your self-interest should enable you to prosper.

Now, Dobson is very clear about the connection between the strict father worldview and free market capitalism. The link is the morality of self-interest, which is a version of Adam Smith's view of capitalism. Adam Smith said that if everyone pursues their own profit, then the profit of all will be maximized by the invisible hand-that is, by nature-just naturally. Go about pursuing your own profit, and you are helping everyone.

This is linked to a general metaphor that views well-being as wealth. For example, if I do you a favor, you say, "I owe you one" or "I'm in your debt." Doing something good for someone is metaphorically like giving him money. He "owes" you something. And he says, "How can I ever repay you?"

Applying this metaphor to Adam Smith's "law of nature," if everyone pursues her own self-interest, then by the invisible hand, by nature, the self-interest of all will be maximized. That is, it is moral to pursue your self-interest, and there is a name for those people who do not do it. The name is do-gooder. A do-gooder is someone who is trying to help someone else rather than herself and is getting in the way of those who are pursuing their self-interest. Do-gooders screw up the system.

In this model there is also a definition of what it means to become a good person. A good person-a moral person-is someone who is disciplined enough to be obedient, to learn what is right, do what is right and not do what is wrong, and to pursue her self-interest to prosper and become self-reliant. A good child grows up to be like that. A bad child is one who does not learn discipline, does not function morally, does not do what is right, and therefore is not disciplined enough to become prosperous. She cannot take care of herself and thus becomes dependent.

When the good children are mature, they either have learned discipline and can prosper, or have failed to learn it. From this point on the strict father is not to meddle in their lives. This translates politically into no government meddling.

Consider what all this means for social programs. It is immoral to give people things they have not earned, because then they will not develop discipline and will become both dependent and immoral. This theory says that social programs are immoral because they make people dependent. Promoting social programs is immoral. And what does this say about budgets? Well, if there are a lot of progressives in Congress who think that there should be social programs, and if you believe that social programs are immoral, how do you stop these immoral people?

It is quite simple. What you have to do is reward the good people-the ones whose prosperity reveals their discipline and hence their capacity for morality-with a tax cut, and make it big enough so that there is not enough money left for social programs. By this logic, the deficit is a good thing. As Grover Norquist says, it "starves the beast." "

There is no such thing as perfect, and all good people will say bad things once or a few more times than that is life. When it all comes down to it, as long as you repent your sins to God, no one is bad in his eyes. He forgives everyone! Haven't you ever said somethig that a "good christian" shouldn't say?

Anyone can call themselves a christian.

Just saying it does not make it true.

Seems most bigots think of themselves as Christians.

Give Jesus' message of unconditional love and universal inclusiveness it makes you wonder where this could be coming from.

Love and blessings Don