I suppose a Christian would answer “the devil” or “Satan”.
But how would a non-Christian answer?
The reason I hold that people think this is that every other kind of spirituality seems to be more popular than Christianity. Discarding the obvious reason for disbelief - that the power of miracles and the immense wisdom of Christ are not accepted as directly from God, the only apparent reason for not following his teaching according to its merit (regardless of the opinion of its origins), is that it is not expeditious, practical, or perhaps easy. Its is the reasons for this latter case of uninterest that I would like to discuss.
In my own case I believed that the doctrine of forgiveness was weakness, but having read the bible (NT only) all my doubts were dispelled. Having tried to follow the teaching, I found that it is indeed not practical, nor easy, but it is expeditious.
Definitely not true here in the US. There are more Christians than you can shake your fist at, and it’s more popular than any other spirituality by several magnitudes.
Heh, I don’t want to sound too snarky, because I wish you were right - and in a perfect world you would be - but what planet are you living on?
ALL the drug dealers I know are christians. ALL of my most promiscuous friends and friends with children out of wedlock are christians. The three most dishonest (meaning they lie, cheat, and steal with reckless abandon) people I’ve ever met in my life are christians.
Oh believe me, I’ve heard a lot of reasons for not following christ, but “it’s too hard” has never been one of them.
Oh, I think that the terms “superstition,” and “believing in a Magical Sky Pixie” (and a jillion other disdainful comments along those lines) indicates that many people think that faith in Jesus is a “weakness.”
I don’t know if I’d say it was the most difficult religion, though. It depends on how faithful you are in adhering to (your interpretation of) it, which denomination you belong to, and so forth. There are some other religions I can think of that are pretty damned hard—particularly on women.
Saying that you are something (or that you do something) and actually doing something about it are two different things. I can claim to be very intellectual and smart, but it’s all just talk, talk, talk until I prove I am actually smart. Same with religion. Same with just about anything.
I’m sure that many of these drug dealers and dishonest people think that they are pretty good, pretty smart people too. Talk is cheap. Backing your words up with action is something completely different.
No, you just met a lot of people who claim to be something because, well, they claim it.
But, if you were to say that in order to be called a Christian, you had to—let’s try something extremely basic—prove that you’re at least trying to not blatantly break any of the Ten Commandments, then all these people you cite aren’t up to snuff. Not even remotely.
But since we don’t do that, and since anyone can call themselves Christian by just saying it, then being Christian isn’t hard at all. You just have to mouth the words. Doesn’t mean much, does it?
You can also claim that you’re smart by just saying it. You can also claim that you are beautiful by just saying it. Whether or not other people will agree with you, or consider you really smart or really beautiful is up for debate. But you can always claim it. There are tons of “really good” out there, and there are tons of “really smart” people out there. They claim they are, so it must be so, right?
yosemite: Oh, I think that the terms “superstition,” and “believing in a Magical Sky Pixie” (and a jillion other disdainful comments along those lines) indicates that many people think that faith in Jesus is a “weakness.”
But the people who use those terms generally apply them to all forms of theism, not just Christianity. That would not explain the OP’s claim that “every other kind of spirituality seems to be more popular than Christianity”.
I think ultrafilter is closer to the answer with the idea that existentialists like Nietzsche, with his critique of Christian doctrine and compassion for the weak and unfortunate in general as “slave morality”, gave rise to a “Christianity-is-for-pussies” attitude.
These days, I think the idea that Christianity implies “weakness” is more of an issue among Christians themselves than among non-Christians. Consider not only the OP but pronouncements from conservative Christians like the Rev. Doug Giles:
So if you’re wondering where the accusations of “Christianity=weakness” are coming from, look for the friendly fire.
I dunno about this. It’s disingenuous to assume that action is the important factor to every single Church. Some denominations believe that action is irrelevant and it is only faith that matters - there are theologians who could accept that someone who was a drug dealer, but who also believed that Jesus was the son of God, born of a sinless woman, was persecuted, died for the sins of mankind, descended into Hell and was resurrected, was 100% Christian.
Jack Chick is an extreme example of this, but that theology does not belong to him alone.
I think you’re taking the “Sky Pixie” thing out of context. I’ve heard that come up in debates here more as a rhetorical point than as an insult. To most Christians, God is an unquestionable reality; so I think many times, when someone says “sky pixie” or “sky magician” or whatever, they’re doing so to try to get you to put the shoe on the other foot, and understand the point of view of someone who doesn’t unquestionably accept that God is real. If you look at it in a cold, objective way, that’s really what God is - a magician who lives in the sky. I’m sure some people are saying that in order to denigrate, but I don’t think most are.
Of the people who don’t believe in God, not all are of the opinion that God-belief is necessarily a weakness. I think people who believe in God are wrong, but not necessarily weak.
“Many” is not “most”. The OP seemed to be implying that Christians are a minority under attack by a larger group. That’s not true.
What exactly do you mean by “following his teaching?” Are you referring to the instructions he gave his twelve disciples in what he called the “gospel of the kingdom?” (Matt. 4:23)
I think it’s more complex than that (poking fun/being snarky) for some people. I’d probably think any person who fails to exercise critical thinking is showing weakness, by taking a weak stance. That is not to say I think all christians do this, I’m referring to people who fall back on “God did it.” I respect a person’s position more when I hear “I don’t know,” and the same applies to other faiths and atheists.
To clarify a bit. I not only prefer someone admitting they don’t have all of the answers, I like to hear they have examined their beliefs further than -
a)This is what my parents believed and so I believe, too.
b)This is what the Bible says and so it must be true.
etc.
I don’t believe the above gives me a license to mock, but I would probably view a person coming from those positions as having a weak stance. OTOH, I’ve known christians who seem to have examined the available evidence and just reached a different conclusion than I have. Since I don’t have all the answers either, I can’t say their position is necessarily any weaker than mine.
