[Serious] Over the top

[Belacqua]

Well the crux of Christianity IS that all humans are BORN dirty and wrong, somehow. Unclean and deserving of eternal torment by virtue of simply being, irrespective of their acts.

That could definitely be interpreted as misanthropic don't you think? Lol

That's not a characterization that all Christians would agree with, but I see what you mean.

I mean, sure the story goes that God loved us so much that he was willing to have his Son murdered just so he tolerate looking at our our fugly, sinful mugs...But that still doesn't change the fact that the Yahweh character does indeed regard humans to be utter fucking garbage no matter what they actually do, until they ADMIT IT.

Again, you're describing YOUR view of Christian theology. 

But let's take your description here as true: it still leaves things a little ambiguous. It seems to be saying that while Christians inherently and essentially view people as bad, nonetheless they think it is inherently and essentially good to save them. Is that hating people (misanthropic) or loving people despite all their flaws? 

(Misanthropy is defined as a dislike of people, not a judgment that they are bad and could be better. The first is a matter of taste, the second is pretty undeniable. If you like -- even love -- people while admitting they are bad and could be better, I don't think that qualifies as misanthropic. 

I mean, think about your own taste -- you strike me as someone who would be bored by someone who is always good, and someone who likes people who are a mix of good and bad. But please correct me if I'm wrong about that.)

---

@Belaqua, William Blake and the Neo Scholastics came centuries after Christianity was born. Their views may be improvements over the original thesis, but can we not forget how Christianity started out doctrinally? You only need to read the Epistles to see where the whole thing about misanthropy is coming from.

I have worked very hard to see where Blake got his theology from. It is deeply rooted in (though different from) Neoplatonism. If you want to understand Blake, read Plotinus. 

Anyway, you've changed the claim somewhat. We could make historical claims that the earliest Christians were misanthropic. (I doubt it, but historical evidence might be presented.) This is still different from claiming that misanthropy is a non-detachable essential part of the Christianity that exists. 

If Christianity without misanthropy can exist, then the quoted claim is false. 

I suppose someone could do a No True Scotsman argument here: all those versions of Christianity without misanthropy aren't really Christianity. But I am not in a position to judge who is a True Christian.