Why I no longer use the term "Christian"

[disneydude]

I am a practicing Catholic and by every sense of the word a "Christian". I admire the life of Christ and have spent countless hours reading the Bible and other religious publications. I used to refer to myself as "Christian" because I am. However, I have noticed that over the last say 5 years or so, the term "Christian" has become "perverted" by the fundamentalist right. It saddens me that they have hijacked the term and turned it into a term synonomous with intolerance, hate and radical politicism. Its a sad day for me that Christ who was compassionate, caring, loving, giving and very tolerant has become associated with the fundamentalist fringe. So to those who "bash" Christians I want to say that not all Christians are "Christian" and to those who consider themselves "Christian" in the fundamentalist sense I ask you to re-evaluate your beliefs in comparison to that of Christ and determine for yourselves if you are truly Christ-like.

 

[Apostle13]

I am honored to define myself as Christian, moreso when others define me as such... Much evil has been done under the banner of Christianity throughout history and continues even today. What of the Good? Ignorant stereotypers are all about us, and certainly not confined to defining Christians alone.
What of the right-sided Christians? Are you being stereotypical..? I mean if I were one to counter in same... And you approached me blurting out, "Hi, I'm Catholic." Should I not then be inclined to keep my children close..?
Maybe you just need to come a higher level of maturity, and realize we are all on the same side.
Personally, I take issue with being defined as religious... But then so do the atheists here.

 

[cnredd]

I am a practicing Catholic and by every sense of the word a "Christian". I admire the life of Christ and have spent countless hours reading the Bible and other religious publications. I used to refer to myself as "Christian" because I am. However, I have noticed that over the last say 5 years or so, the term "Christian" has become "perverted" by the fundamentalist right. It saddens me that they have hijacked the term and turned it into a term synonomous with intolerance, hate and radical politicism. Its a sad day for me that Christ who was compassionate, caring, loving, giving and very tolerant has become associated with the fundamentalist fringe. So to those who "bash" Christians I want to say that not all Christians are "Christian" and to those who consider themselves "Christian" in the fundamentalist sense I ask you to re-evaluate your beliefs in comparison to that of Christ and determine for yourselves if you are truly Christ-like.

So instead of trying to get the term back and have the meaning you so readily wish it to be, you decide to surrender to those you find evil and give them exactly what they want...legitimacy to the term...

By any chance are you French?....

 

[kal-el]

Personally, I take issue with being defined as religious... But then so do the atheists here.

I definetly would have pegged you for being religious. I am curious as to why you take issue with that? I take issue with that because I see atheism as a point of view. Theism is a philosophical point of view, athesim is the oppostitte.

 

[tecoyah]

There is a valid point in the OP....as the term is definately being used to the detriment of many who are faithful. In some circles it is almost an insult now....which is a pity.But hey....welcome to my world, believe it or not, I dont sacrifice small animals or eat babies.

 

[disneydude]

So instead of trying to get the term back and have the meaning you so readily wish it to be, you decide to surrender to those you find evil and give them exactly what they want...legitimacy to the term...

By any chance are you French?....

If I knew how to take back the term I would. I don't think its possible. I prefer to say "I believe in Christ" or "I accept the teachings of Christ" rather than use the term "Christian".
Its really become synonomous to the situation with the word "Gay" which has a completely different accepted meaning than it did many years ago.

 

[Apostle13]

I definetly would have pegged you for being religious. I am curious as to why you take issue with that? I take issue with that because I see atheism as a point of view. Theism is a philosophical point of view, athesim is the oppostitte.

The term religious is to broad in definition. It has more and more become synonymous/compounded to/with words like; fanatic, extremist, legalistic, zealot, terrorist, etc. Are not the terrorists often described as being religious..?
The word itself at its root is taken from religion L. religio, piety, conscientiousness, scrupulousness. Also religare, To gather, to collect, making the primary meaning a collection, and more specifically a collection of formulating ideas.
Therefore, in strict sense of its actual meaning, we are all religious to whatever degree, and to whatever majority sense in so far as them who would agree with our own individual conclusiveness.
In the larger scheme it pettys its way down to two groups; leaders or followers. Lest of course you've your own religion, whereby, you become as both by following your own lead..:mrgreen:

 

[kal-el]

The term religious is to broad in definition. It has more and more become synonymous/compounded to/with words like; fanatic, extremist, legalistic, zealot, terrorist, etc. Are not the terrorists often described as being religious..?
The word itself at its root is taken from religion L. religio, piety, conscientiousness, scrupulousness. Also religare, To gather, to collect, making the primary meaning a collection, and more specifically a collection of formulating ideas.
Therefore, in strict sense of its actual meaning, we are all religious to whatever degree, and to whatever majority sense in so far as them who would agree with our own individual conclusiveness.
In the larger scheme it pettys its way down to two groups; leaders or followers. Lest of course you've your own religion, whereby, you become as both by following your own lead..:mrgreen:

Ok, fair enough. But what classification do you think should be used to describe it, if not religious?

 

[Apostle13]

Ok, fair enough. But what classification do you think should be used to describe it, if not religious?

Why Christian suits me fine, but I will concede to slight, the opening post... Yet, not to a point of redefining. Also, I'm sure you have heard me use the terms True believers and Saints here on the forum. It is meant as a method of distinguishing. Within the Church (speaking relevant to the whole, Christ centered ones) there are sheep and goats... Wheat or tares. Well you know of the parables. The religious spirited ones are snobulots or Holierthanthous if you will... Easily identified to the more discerning. Ironically they are the true hypocrites and the focal view of the ones outside looking in... Maybe not unlike yourself (looking in). It is better that Christianity not be judged as a whole cause the bad apples always seem to be at the top of the barrel.

 

[AmbassadorKissoff]

I am a practicing Catholic and by every sense of the word a "Christian". I admire the life of Christ and have spent countless hours reading the Bible and other religious publications. I used to refer to myself as "Christian" because I am. However, I have noticed that over the last say 5 years or so, the term "Christian" has become "perverted" by the fundamentalist right. It saddens me that they have hijacked the term and turned it into a term synonomous with intolerance, hate and radical politicism. Its a sad day for me that Christ who was compassionate, caring, loving, giving and very tolerant has become associated with the fundamentalist fringe. So to those who "bash" Christians I want to say that not all Christians are "Christian" and to those who consider themselves "Christian" in the fundamentalist sense I ask you to re-evaluate your beliefs in comparison to that of Christ and determine for yourselves if you are truly Christ-like.

The Bible uses the word Christian. You are one. So dont allow modern thoughts to sway your standards

 

[Rev.]

Its a sad day for me that Christ who was compassionate, caring, loving, giving and very tolerant has become associated with the fundamentalist fringe.

What was Christ tolerant of?

So to those who "bash" Christians I want to say that not all Christians are "Christian" and to those who consider themselves "Christian" in the fundamentalist sense I ask you to re-evaluate your beliefs in comparison to that of Christ and determine for yourselves if you are truly Christ-like.

What does a Fundamentalist believe that is contrary to what Christ taught? Do you even know what makes a Fundamentalist a Fundamentalist? Or have you bought the stereotype, too?

As much as you do, I really hate it when people broad brush an entire group of people according to the behavior of some.

 

[disneydude]

What was Christ tolerant of?



What does a Fundamentalist believe that is contrary to what Christ taught? Do you even know what makes a Fundamentalist a Fundamentalist? Or have you bought the stereotype, too?

As much as you do, I really hate it when people broad brush an entire group of people according to the behavior of some.

Believe it or not, I am not trying to paint a broad brush which is why I indicated in my post that not all Christians are "Christian" in the sense of the word that it is so often interpreted today.

"Christian" has become a negative word to many people in society today. Why? I believe it has to do with vocal "Fundamentalist" churches that don't preach the teachings of christ but rather focus the majority of their agenda on political issues such as abortion and homosexuality. These groups are so vocal in their agendas and throw the word "Christian" around without really referring to anything having to do with Christ. They will say "We'll I'm Christian......". It demeans the life of Christ and takes away from his teachings.

What was Christ tolerant of? If you have to ask the question than I don't think you "know" Christ. But in response I will tell you that a large part of the teachings of Christ focus on loving your fellow mankind, being a good person in the service of others, living a self-less life. Christ spent a great deal of his time with the poor and the weak. He didn't condemn the prostitutes, he washed their feet for God's sake.

Christ spoke out against the hypocrites that pray out in the open rather than in their hearts and privacy. I am not saying that Christ was against public prayer, but what is abundantly clear in this particular teaching and taking all of his teachings into consideration, Christ was not fond of the pious individuals who claimed to be religious in their words but not in their actions.

These are the very groups that have perverted the term and have made many of us in the Christian community ashamed to refer to ourselves as "Christians" because he don't want to be affiliated with the radical fringe and the pious hypocrites that our Christ spoke out against.

 

[disneydude]

^
I also left out....
"What was Christ tolerant of?"
Have you forgotten that he asked forgiveness of the very people who crucified him. If you believe in Christ, isn't that the ultimate tolerance?

 

[Rev.]

Believe it or not, I am not trying to paint a broad brush which is why I indicated in my post that not all Christians are "Christian" in the sense of the word that it is so often interpreted today.

Look, you started a thread with the sentiment "People are judging me inaccurately because of this particular word..." and then you turned around and called an entire political position "Fundamentalist" which was in inaccurate use of the word. You did what you don't what others doing to you.

Fundamentalism is not a political position, it is a theological position. It is a way of understanding God. And while it is true that Fundamentalists are politically conservative, there are also Evangelicals and even Roman Catholics who hold conservative leanings. It's not right to label them Fundamentalist because of how they vote.

"Christian" has become a negative word to many people in society today. Why? I believe it has to do with vocal "Fundamentalist" churches that don't preach the teachings of christ but rather focus the majority of their agenda on political issues such as abortion and homosexuality. These groups are so vocal in their agendas and throw the word "Christian" around without really referring to anything having to do with Christ. They will say "We'll I'm Christian......". It demeans the life of Christ and takes away from his teachings.

I appreciate your sentiment, but I will disagree. "Christian" has become a negative word because every man has made himself a God unto himself, and he alone can decide for himself what is right and what is wrong. People have rejected the idea than ANYONE can have any authority over him--not parents, not government, and especially not God. Morals have become flexible according to the particular person and particular situation...and most morals have as it's goal "Whatever results in the least amount of discomfort for ME"

What was Christ tolerant of? If you have to ask the question than I don't think you "know" Christ. But in response I will tell you that a large part of the teachings of Christ focus on loving your fellow mankind, being a good person in the service of others, living a self-less life. Christ spent a great deal of his time with the poor and the weak. He didn't condemn the prostitutes, he washed their feet for God's sake.

No, Jesus didn't wash any prostitute's feet...and he wasn't tolerant either. Tolerance means "to permit without prohibition." Jesus forgave the prostitute and said to her "Go, and sin no more." He prohibited her from further practice of her trade. That's not tolerance. Nowhere did Jesus wink at sin...either outside the religious establishment or inside.

Christ spoke out against the hypocrites that pray out in the open rather than in their hearts and privacy. I am not saying that Christ was against public prayer, but what is abundantly clear in this particular teaching and taking all of his teachings into consideration, Christ was not fond of the pious individuals who claimed to be religious in their words but not in their actions.

Very true. Yet another example of Jesus' "intolerance."

These are the very groups that have perverted the term and have made many of us in the Christian community ashamed to refer to ourselves as "Christians" because he don't want to be affiliated with the radical fringe and the pious hypocrites that our Christ spoke out against.

As someone who is fighting this battle from inside the Christian Community, I know what you are saying. But I don't think the battle will be won by abandoning the word "Christian" to those who abuse it in Jesus name. Plus there is something to be learned from these Fundamentalists...Christianity is a RADICAL lifestyle. We are not of this world...we are not supposed to blend in. We are a "peculiar" people. The Fundamentalists take that charge a lot more seriously the the rest of the Christians.

 

[disneydude]

I understand what you are saying Rev. However, I disagree with you on one level. I know that using the term "Fundamentalist" is a generalization and that not everyone is going to fit into that category, however, it is the fundamentalist groups that are the ones who have become rabid about their use of the term "Christian". The point that I am making is that these groups have become less and less about religion and more and more about politics. When the pulpit becomes a platform for politics it is my belief that we are getting away from religion and into the realm of political lobbying. For me, religion has always been a personal matter. I do not believe that I should expect others to share my religious beliefs. I think that by doing so I am doing exactly opposite of what Christ taught when it comes to being non-judgmental and being humble. I know that some people will say that I am being judgmental in this very post, however, keep it mind that my position is and always has been, people are entitled to their beliefs and I will strongly stand behind any radical right wingers right to practice their religious beliefs in the same manner I would stand behind a jew, muslim, buddhist, etc.
However, government should never become the tool of any religious group over another. That would go against everything that this country was founded on.

 

[Rev.]

I understand what you are saying Rev. However, I disagree with you on one level. I know that using the term "Fundamentalist" is a generalization and that not everyone is going to fit into that category, however, it is the fundamentalist groups that are the ones who have become rabid about their use of the term "Christian". The point that I am making is that these groups have become less and less about religion and more and more about politics. When the pulpit becomes a platform for politics it is my belief that we are getting away from religion and into the realm of political lobbying.

Well then, we don't disagree at all. :smile:

But if I can attempt to show you why this is a theological issue: the fundamentalists believe it is their God given mandate to govern according to Christian principles. They find in the writings of the founding fathers an effort to establish a Christian nation governed by Biblical Laws...and indeed they are right. The founding fathers wanted a nation that was not a respecter of one religion (read here "denomination) over another. They had come from England which has as its official church the Anglicans. They came from Germany which has as its official church Lutheranism. They came from Scotland which has as its official church Presbyterianism. They fully intended for America to be Christian, but not Baptist or Methodist or whatever.

For me, religion has always been a personal matter. I do not believe that I should expect others to share my religious beliefs. I think that by doing so I am doing exactly opposite of what Christ taught when it comes to being non-judgmental and being humble. I know that some people will say that I am being judgmental in this very post, however, keep it mind that my position is and always has been, people are entitled to their beliefs and I will strongly stand behind any radical right wingers right to practice their religious beliefs in the same manner I would stand behind a jew, muslim, buddhist, etc.

I respect that...but it misses a good part of what Jesus taught us to do which is "Go into all the world and preach..." Jesus really did intend for us to share...not our beliefs but our TESTIMONY of what God has done for us. Why? So that others might believe TOO.

As for being non-judgemental...when Jesus taught us not to judge, he was not saying "Refrain from saying 'This is right and that is wrong." Jesus spent plenty of time going around saying what behavior was right and wrong...Paul told the Corinthians to expell a certian church member for sleeping with his father's wife. What else is that but judging? No, what we cannot do is declare the fate of someone's soul...to say "You are going to hell" when you have sin in your own life. Saying "homosexuality is wrong" is not being judgemental. Saying, "You're going to hell because you are gay" is.

Humility is admitting that you have a need for God...that you can't get to heaven on your own, you can't be "good" on your own strength, that nothing that you have was gained by your own efforts.

However, government should never become the tool of any religious group over another. That would go against everything that this country was founded on.

I agree with that!

 

[disneydude]

I recognize that the founding fathers were Christians, however, that does not mean, nor it should, that this is a "Christian" nation. Certainly, Christians and "Christians" should have every right to practice their religion openly and freely without any type of government interference.

I also agree that Christ told us to go into the world and preach but he also taught us the way to do it "Let your light so shine that they may see your good works and glorify your father which is in heaven". Christ taught us to preach by example not by political pulpiting.

As for the being "Judgmental", I agree with you here. There is nothing wrong with someone saying "Homosexuality is wrong or its a sin", people and religions are entitled to have their beliefs. What I think is wrong is when religious groups try to influence government policies to reflect their beliefs.