If I recall corectly, there’s also a scene in Pilgrim’s Progress where Christians get to watch sinners burn in Hell from Heaven.
It’s not a ubiquitous idea in Christianity (or at least not generally expressed out loud), but it exists and has some history.
Now, if you are asking if it’s OK for Christians to look down on non-Christians, I think all Christians would tell you that the answer is an unequivocal no. That would be the sin of pride–called the “mother of all sins” for a reason. It is the hardest to root out and will be found in the sources of all other sins.
Christians are instead supposed to cultivate humility–which is the forgetting of self and of pride, considering oneself in the same way as every other person. When you really remember that other people are just as important as you are, and you are just as happy or sad about others’ accomplishments or griefs as you are about your own, without any envy or superiority, then you’re being humble. It’s hard to do for more than about a minute at a time before pride shows up again.
I guess that can read very differently depending on the context (I’d like to see the parts that are snipped out of the above quote) and the perspective/preconceptions of the reader. I don’t see anything in the provided text that actually says anybody will be taking pleasure in the suffering of others. What I see is the person in Heaven seeing the suffering of the damned and realizing, “That could have been me.” “…how they will rejoice [that they are in Heaven]”. In other words, the rejoicing is for their own eternal bliss; the rejoicing isn’t over the suffering of others.
Whatever the actual intent of Mr. Edwards’, we’ve seen time and again that anybody can take anything and twist it to suit their own ends, deliberately or as the result of misunderstanding the words. However, without knowing the full context, I will concede that perhaps Mr. Edwards’ intent was just as you’ve stated it. I can’t make a definite statement one way or the other. I can say, though, that I’m another one who has never heard such a belief put forth in any church I’ve attended.
Fair enough. Here is the unexpurgated passage; draw your own conclusions. Full text is here, if for some reason you desire to read the entire sermon. I assume it is in the public domain, as it was published in 1773.
I’m not surprised by this. I associate the view in question with Puritans/early-ish Aglo-American Protestants, which is why I’m not surprised that **Dio **recollects reading something about it in The Pilgrim’s Progress. I doubt if many today would believe or openly express this view. It’s pretty old-school angry God stuff. (Come to think of it, I wouldn’t be surprised to hear someone like Phelps express it–he and Edwards have a lot in common.)
Yes, duh.
Hopefully someone will provide the Bible verses that instruct Christians to basically exclude non-Christians. I can’t think of it right now.
If you’ve ever been in an area in which the evangelicals are a majority, you’ve noticed that they can’t stand it if you are succeeding without blindly submitting to them, especially if you are out-performing them. (The blind obedience is actually more important than anything in your conscience. Without that, they don’t notice one way or another.) They will seek to tear you down (they will refuse to speak to you, often even look at you) as a proof of what God does to those nasty sinners, since God isn’t getting around to tearing you down fast enough Himself. Then they confuse themselves with God for having torn you down. The dumber they are, the more pronounced this effect, in a kind of self-reinforcing way i.e. to them ‘dumber’ is better. This is where the mouth-breathing knuckle-dragger set originates. They’ll destroy the entire society if given enough rope.
Someone is going to say that these aren’t ‘real’ Christians. I suppose not, but then again ‘everything is permitted’, including perverting the intended message of their own religion. My observation is that perverting the message in practice is pretty much the main event in ‘applied’ v ‘theoretical’ Christianity. Honestly, there isn’t such a thing as a ‘real’ Christian, and hate plays a more central role than they will ever admit.
There is a common Bumper Sticker I see all the time.
Christians aren’t perfect were just forgiven
That may be so, but the behavior of many could lead one to think that the original Greek word for ‘forgiven’ translates to either ‘denial’ or ‘weaponized, intentional incompetence’.
It’s not clear to me if this is a poll or a debate.
To the extent that it’s a debate, I’d say there’s a fair amount of hasty generalization in this thread. Undoubtedly there are some, perhaps many, maybe a majority of Christians that look down at non-Christians. But all I see here is people sharing their opinions. And of the people sharing their opinions, many appear to be conflating fundamentalist Christians with all Christians. Others draw that distinction, but still offer only anecdotes rather than any data-driven evidence. IS it possible that some selection bias is at work here? To what extent is it skewing your perception?
Obviously, for a poll, these are not particularly relevant questions; for a debate, I think they are.
My answer: I think many Christians do look down on non-Christians, especially if “look down,” can mean pity, condescension, superiority, or some combination thereof. I’d even be comfortable saying “most.”
For my own part, having once identified as agnostic, I’m not prepared to say that anyone who has openly and honestly examined his beliefs and his world is in bad shape, spiritual-wise. Roman Catholics have the doctrine of “baptism by desire” which says that someone who doesn’t know and believe in the gospel, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his best understanding of what that means, can be saved; the assumption is that such a person would have wanted to be baptized if he had known and understood its significance. (Catechism 1290).
…for leaving out the apostrophe in “we’re.” 
Surprisingly, people seem to have radically different reactions to this bumper sticker, as seen in this three-page thread about it, in which some interpreted it as a sign of arrogance, others as a sign of humility.
In pretty well every group, be it racial, religious, national, political or what-have-you that people self-identify with, members look down on those who are not part of the group - they are not as cool, as enlightened, as saved, as smart, as “real”, their history is not as significant, etc. etc.
That’s pretty basic to group identity. Christians certainly are not immune from it. The more people identify with the group, the more they are willing to invest group membership with some sort of significance or dignity lacking in others.
I do think the feeling has a tendency to become more pronounced in religion, though.
And not in, say, political affiliation or philosophy? Dem vs. Rep, Communists vs. Capitalists?
I think it’s a function of how strongly one identifies. Certainly some people identify with their religion strongly enough to kill ‘infidels’ or ‘pagans’ or whatever the term is simply for not belonging; but then, some folks these days feel that way about their nationality or race.
In our society it is simply more respectable these days to allow such excessive group identification (not to the point of killing others, but to the point at least of looking down on others) in certain respects (such as religion, class identification, and political affiliation) but not in others (ethnic or racial self-identification). The reason is that the former categories are to an extent self-chosen (the latter are as well to an extent, but “race” and ethnicity are popularly supposed to be immutable characteristics).
What’s the hierarchy for Evangelicals? I’d guess it would be other Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Unitarians, “other”, Islam, and atheists.
One typically does not advertise their humility on a bumper sticker. Sort of defeats the purpose.
I’ll kick the ass of anyone who does not acknowledge my humility.
Expressing a sentiment that a geniunely humble person would express does not equal advertising one’s humility.
Sure. Look at how warmly Democrats view their Republican cousins. And how willing Republicans are to ascribe to Democrats only the best motives.
This has definitely been my experience. And it’s more than just a ‘they’re different from us’ vibe. I’ve met quite a few Christians who think that they are superior to non-Christians because of what they believe. I’ve heard claims of moral superiority because their morality comes from the true god and other people’s does not. I’ve even heard claims that people who are not Christian simply cannot be moral, because they are not Christian.