Christians (whatever subset you might be)! Come hither! This is in response to the Christianity/Gobear thread in the pit. From what I am reading it seems as though most Chrisitans in the thread are trying to dodge the responsibility of keeping the leaders (even if they are a vocal minority) at bay. Let me see if I can clarify at all. I am an American citizen who doesn’t believe that my current president, nor the majority of my leadership in Washington, represent me or my values. It is my RESPONSIBILITY to let that be known by voting, dissenting, and doing everything in my power to change that. Being quiet about that would be nothing less than passive support for my leaders. Now, if Christians don’t like the labels that they are earning in this country they need to do something about it. All I seem to be reading from Xians on this board is how that is just a minority and it doesn’t represent them or their beliefs. Well, guess what? It does represent you. You are letting it represent you. Just like the quiet individual who goes along with Bush’s policies but doesn’t agree with them at all. From what I read on this board 99% of the Christians are extremely intelligent and tolerant of others. I am lead to believe that most Christians might be the same way. If you don’t take responsibility for what is representing you in the world (which is the fundies) then how can you blame people for making the generalization that all chrisitans must support it. Until I see an anti-Fallwell rally (or any kind of public denouncing) I have to assume that you don’t mind being lumped into that category. Maybe I am being ignorant? Chime in with your thoughts or attacks on my position.
Yes.
You seem to labor under the belief that there is a central government of Christianity when one doesn’t exist. The Pope heads up the largest sect but does not speak for protestant beleifs. And the nutjob evangalists that get all the press don’t represent Catholics.
I think that your logic is flawed. A person can belong to a broad belief system, but still disagree with some of the actions and policies of that system.
All Dems don’t agree on the same issues as neither do republicans. And its pretty obvious that there are multiple factions of Muslim and Christianity sects out there.
It is true that twe don’t see a Fred Phelps Rally being overshadow by a march three times as large as the population of the town they are in, however:
you are ignoring history. When christian want to be kind and gentle, they quote bible verse about being kind to your neighbor. Historically however, they have not, and that is what is responsable for the current label, not modern interpretations.
Psalm 21
21:8 Thine hand shall find out all thine enemies: thy right hand shall find out those that hate thee.
21:9 Thou shalt make them as a fiery oven in the time of thine anger: the LORD shall swallow them up in his wrath, and the fire shall devour them.
21:10 Their fruit shalt thou destroy from the earth, and their seed from among the children of men.
21:11 For they intended evil against thee: they imagined a mischievous device, which they are not able to perform.
21:12 Therefore shalt thou make them turn their back, when thou shalt make ready thine arrows upon thy strings against the face of them.
21:13 Be thou exalted, LORD, in thine own strength: so will we sing and praise thy power.
Matthew 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Matthew 10:34
“Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.”
Luke 12:51
“Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.”
King James’ Version of the Bible
So a Christian saying they don’t agree with some of the very conservative Christians isn’t throwing off the label how? I’m not sure how you expect Christians to get rid of the labels which you are applying to them other than to say, “I don’t fall under that category.” You yourself say that you are lead to believe that 99% of Christians are loving, caring, tolerant people from what you’ve seen on this board.
As for the labels, only the willfully blind would believe that people like Phelps and co. are supposed to represent the majority of Christians. Like BubbaDog said, there are many different denominations and flavors of Christianity. To hold one group responsible for the actions of another is incorrect.
I think I understand a little bit better now. It isn’t so much as going with the flow as I thought it was earlier. I would like to ask this now. How can Christians that don’t believe in a “fundie” brand of Christianity distance themselves it? Shouldn’t it be in their best interest to? If someone is abusing the term Christian shouldn’t another Christian call them on it? If I am a soldier in Iraq and I see another soldier acting in a way as to damage the image of all soldiers, should I not stop them or denounce what they are doing?
There might be a rejection of the label for that one particular person, but it does nothing to change perception of what ‘Christianity’ is as a social and political force. i think that’s the issue. You can personally object all you want, but unless there is some sort of opposition to Christian politics as it is practice in the US, it is naive to think you can escape beling labeled.
While they might be a vocal minority, they make up enough of a political majority to tar your entire faith. And that’s something you can either live with or fight against.
But the OP is correct in saying that silence is tacit permission, even approval. When only one side of the story is seen and heard, it is the one that is accepted as truth. Frankly, these meatheads have stolen a decent faith and twisted it for their own agenda.
Where are the mainstream Christian speakers who should be debunking the filth that spews from Dobson/Phelps et al?
Where are the prominent Christian ministers who have anything close to the PR of a Pat Robertson etc?
It is more than time for them to demand equal air time and get the true Christian message out–no matter how much we differ on interpretation of Scripture–all mainstream Xians can get behind the message of tolerance and love that Jesus preached. Where is that, in the news?
Sojourner mag is good, and has a good website, but that’s the only one I can think of offhand.
This is one of the reasons I am “off” church these days. Call it a personal protest–yes, I am throwing the baby out with the bath water, but to me, the bath water is toxic.
A large part of the problem comes from the fact that the very things that give the evangelical and very conservative sects their power are the things that the more tolerant and open Christians don’t want to touch.
Take televangelising, for example. Of course these people are famous. They promise healing, better lives, guaranteed salvation, all just by watching their program. They routinely fill stadiums full of people who only want to be part of something without going in much deeper than the surface. This powerful venue isn’t available for somebody who doesn’t believe in this - people just aren’t as drawn in to a person expounding at length on the various interpretations and how you, the audience, need to formulate your own beliefs. Most people just want to be told what to believe.
How can you fight this willing ignorance?
Jeezus! :eek:
If you are telling me that there is no way to fight these liars and expose them for who theyare, no way to send the proper message of what Christianity is truly about, then they deserve to get lumped together with them. If people agree with the likes of the extremists then it shouldn’t be a problem, but if they don’t want that label then they should fight it with everything they can. They shouldn’t sit by idle and complain that they are being lumped together.
Let me ask you a question then: if people decide to put you into a category with people you don’t want to be associated with, on whom is the onus of proving that you don’t belong there? In the case of Christians, neither group, conservative or liberal, wants to be lumped together. Yet some people are clearly unwilling to grant them this request. Is it so hard to recognize the divide between two very disparate groups?
I think I should only be held accountable for my own actions.
I self-identify as a Christian. So does Peter Popoff. Peter Popoff has made a fortune as a scam artist. If you choose to lump me in with him just because we both self-identify with a similar label, it’s not really any skin off my nose.
To the Op - I don’t quite understand what you’re asking, but I think I get the basic gist.
As a Christian, I differentiate myself from those shaming the name of Christ by doing things like being kind to my friends and neighbors, working in the community, being tolerant of people I disagree with - in short, all things that do not attract the attention that bombing abortion clinics and televangelizing do.
I also attend protests against the currrent administration’s evil actions, choose not to endorse either corrupt, misrepresentative party in the fundamentally flawed American system of government, and so on. These things get me lumped in with non-Christians.
Let’s be realistic - the message and teachings of Christ is so liberal that it makes Nelson Mandela blush.
Contrary to what many Christians say, I think the creepy, evil “Evangelicals” (though their actions consistently turn people away from Christ rather than bringing his message to them) are not a vocal minority, but rather are the new majority - though their embrace of the anti-Christ Republican party and Bush administration and endorsement of exploitative capitalism runs perfectly contrary to the teachings of Christ.
Why aren’t Christians like myself more organized? Well, we’re pretty disparate, even within communities; when the label “Christian” has become so compromised and perverted, how is one legitimate Christian able to seek out other Christians without inadvertently running into a 'Christian" (Bush-endorsing anti-Christ)? The
Sojourners are one group of legitimate Christians who are organized and willing to call out self-appointed leaders like Falwell and Robertson while protesting the current administration. I personally contributed some cash to help run this ad, which is one small step in addressing the legitimate question the OP puts forward. It’s a long, long road ahead, though.
If things continue down this current path, with affluent, Republican “Christians” and legitimate followers of Christ diverging, I envision a new denomination or even a schism within Christianity as a whole - maybe a new “Protest-ant” movement or something of the sort, in which people like myself organize and officially split off from the corrupt, anti-Christ behemoth that “Christianity” has become.
Yeah, him too! 
I’d join that new movement if it happened.
Don’t talk piffle, Ashtar. When somebody treats you poorly or thinks of you as sub-human because he or she has labeled Christians as ignorant bigots, it is skin off your nose. Multiply that poor treatment across America or the world, and that is a lot of skin.
As to the OP, while I do agree that tolerant Christians are responsible for their nonexistent PR, I also think that non-churchgoers are missing a big part of the picture. The Christians I know who are dissatisfied with their self-appointed representatives don’t want to start a nation-wide campaign for several reasons: 1) they don’t want to hear cries of “some brotherly love! See how you Christians treat each other?” 2) As others has noted, there is no central organization with the legitimate authority to decide how Christians should be portrayed.
What these Chrsitians are doing is talking to their pastors (quietly, in private), correcting their friends when they parrot a Phelpsism, and generally avoiding saying anything stupid enough to be repeated by the American media.
As far as ‘letting’ Bush represent Christians…were Christians who are morally opposed to partial birth abortion and human euthenasia and same sex marrige supposed to vote for Kerry? I spent the entire election year and most of the time since telling people that while I completly agree with neither candidate, I am going to vote for the candidate who more closely represents my side on the issues important to me. For conservative Christians, Bush was a better representative than Kerry. And Christians didn’t exactly vote for Fallwell, Robertson, or the Pope. These people are getting airtime exactly becasue they are outrageous. An intelligent discussion between rational, mainstream Christian and non-Christian representatives is not marketable so media chooses to illustrate the absurd to get you to watch. I would love to get all the extremists off the air and give up the 24 hour news channels, but as long as people continue to watch (I, for one, don’t) then it will continue to be on the air.
Although…depending on how this thread turns out…maybe we could sent it to FOX"news" and tell them to get it right or we’re not watching anymore.
The problem with organized religion is that it is run by people. People are inherenty flawed (from a Christian perspective). I choose to believe that the NT talk of church wasn’t a “Church” with a building and a leader and a collection plate and an approved group of songs and prayers as much as it was a group of like-minded individuals who are in fellowship with other believers. But, since these groups are almost by definition unorganized…it is hard to get us all doing something together. In my mind the SDMB more resembles the NT church then the ‘Holy Roman Catholic Church’
I’m not trying to be argumentative, but I really don’t see how.
I’m gay. A certain subset of the gay male community tends to have a great deal of unsafe sex, use hard drugs (particularly methamphetamine), and have an unhealthy fascination with really shitty pop stars. Should I have to apologize for gay men’s sexual habits or love of Britney Spears? Do I have to loudly disclaim it? Is it my responsibility to make sure people who do those things are suitably marginalized in society?
I don’t think so. So applying that logic, I think Christians are off the hook for the actions of certain fundamentalists.