Plenty of believers are sick of this also!
"We use that word—Christian—to refer to people who are evangelical Christians," says Dobson spokesperson Gary Schneeberger.
Well, whoopee for you, Dobson, because in that Book you insist on using as a science text it also states "come unto Me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest."
Weirdness . . . most Christians I know would *love* for more people to rejoice in Christ; yet here's Dobson, putting up a fence to rival the Berlin Wall to keep anyone out who doesn't follow his social/political agenda.
Hey, James! It's called Christianity, not Dobsonianity!
Unfortunately, theses days, the only thing it resembles is insainty.
I wish more of our moderate religious would stand up to these loud demagogues who use thier religion for nothing more than social control and an apparently endless quest for more power.
Cheers.
I predicted this several years ago, that the christian right will eventually turn on each other. The scent of political power is too intoxicating to let them overlook their theological differences much longer. Forunately, the abject failure of the annointed Bush administration has the dominionists blaming everyone in sight for the Bush debacle, except themselves, of course.
The feeding frenzy should be a thing of beauty.
Sigh. More "My Jesus can beat up your Jesus" games. Although, Paul has a point--maybe there will be some schadenfreudish fun out of this instead of the usual depressing tiresomeness. I suppose that Dobson turning up in the next police raid of his friendly neighborhood bathhouse is too much to wish for? ('Nuther sigh...)
This is the whole "you have to witness" argument. This goes on all the time, even in the mainline churches. It was an uncomfortable spot for me growing up, being an unbeliever in confirmation classes, being presented with a speaker who likes to "shake things up" and talk to the kids about our responsibility to "share Jesus." I knew right then, "No way!"
This is why half of the people who approach you on street corners to "witness" to you look like they're about to throw up beforehand. It's scary. They don't like it, but they "have to do it."
"We use that word—Christian—to refer to people who are evangelical Christians," says Dobson spokesperson Gary Schneeberger.
Might be more important to see whom God refers with that term.
When humans try to second guess God, they usually don't do so well....
Back in 2004 when I was canvassing for Kerry/Edwards, two little girls (maybe around 7-8 years old) told me, "We don't want Kerry to become president. We don't think he's a real christian."
I bit my tongue and didn't say any of the mean things that came into my head, e.g., "You'd better hope god didn't hear you say that; he might strike you dead." or "Oh, wow, you must be god to be able to decide that."
Instead I just said, "I don't think his mother would agree with you." I figure those little girls had already been abused enough.
Near the end of the post the point was made: "We're sick and tired of fundamentalists defining who 's a good Christian, and who's not." To me such a statement is larded over with irony since it seems to me that there exists no definition at all for what constitutes Christian or Christianity. Read on to find out why.
A similar topic was discussed recently over at Amused Muse, and I posted much what follows here, over there.
Implicit in the above quote is the assumption that Christianity is a thing that can be defined. I feel compelled to point out that a person can be Christian and believe anything he or she damn well chooses. The only characteristic distinguishing self-identified Christians from non-Christians is the shared use of the word "Christian." According to the Princeton Theological Seminary, there are about 24000, that's twenty four thousand, distinct Christian sects in the world today, and, ideologically or theologically, there is nothing common to all of them.
God is not common. There are many atheist - that's right, no god, no divine Jesus, no miracles - Christian sects. See harrytcook.com for a practicing atheist Christian Episcopalian minister. Harry's been an ordained minister for over 40 years. My favorite quote from Harry is, "I have been able to say from the pulpit these words - 'I am an atheist in that I am not a theist' - and there is scarcely to be seen the blinking of an eye among those in the pews. They get it." [Harry welcomes questions, here's his contact information: e-mail: revharrytcook@aol.com phone: 248.709.9689]
My brother is also a practicing Lutheran minister who is an atheist and he has several atheist friends in the clergy. Millions of atheists are social Christians, going to church only to fulfull the universal human need to associate with others, and, yet, they, too, are shoved under the Christian umbrella. So, God is not common among the numerous Christianities, but there are also many other areas where the thousands of Christianities lack overlap.
Hell is not common. Heaven is not common. Satan is not common. Trinity is not common. The Holy Ghost is not common. Miracles are not common. Disembodied evil is not common. Orginal sin is not common. Inherited sin is not common. Inherent sinfulness is not common.
The definitions of basic concepts like sin and morality are not common. What is and is not moral according to the myriad Christianities, ranges all the way to hell and back. For some birth control is a sin; for some it would be immoral to allow reproduction to run amok. For some you are damned for playing cards; some use regular gambling as fund raisers. Some disallow drinking alcohol at all; some serve it on church property at various times. The number of conflicting variations, competing alternatives, and damning subtleties truly staggers any rational sensibilities.
To more strongly underscore that the word Christian does not have any standard meaning o
To more strongly underscore that the word Christian does not have any standard meaning or interpretation, you can even roll your own version of Christianity, or any other fabricated religion for that matter - think Branch Davidian's Koresh, Mormon Joseph Smith, Christian Science Mary Baker Eddy, Scientology L. Ron Hubbard, or the hundreds of New Age (many being Christianity-rooted) religions of more recent times. Realize there is no religion approval committee, no supernatural bullshit vetting board, and no True-Christianity clearinghouse. Anyone can apply the word Christian to themselves and do whatever they choose. You can concoct any arbitrary junk theology and call it Christian. You don't need a permit or anything.
Whereas you can start from scratch and completely invent your own Christian religion, established mainstream religions, are maintained and retooled by committee. Catholicism, for instance, showed its completely manufactured heritage recently when they dumped limbo. For centuries they cut deep psychological scars with limbo, and, now, essentially on a whim they just wave it off like a gnat. If it was real, could they simply cast it aside?
It's clear that barring the exhaustive listing of untold numbers of subjective descriptions of Christianity by those applying the word to themselves, Christianity escapes definition.
Broadly, Christianity is a series of congregations acting as social clubs united by whatever it is they locally agree upon as their definition of Christianity. US Christianity is a completely unrestrained free-market free-for-all with the sects(businesses) competing by selling products and services, lobbying for political favors, and running huge budget ad campaigns to increase market share. All paid for with donated money.
Please remember this post whenever someone asks you to define Christianity. Christianity can be whatever you dream it to be: spa, styling salon, fitness club, actual church, political action committee or nothing at all. What defines Christianity is limited only by the extent of your creativity.
Ding-ding-ding. They lose. Actually, Dobson and Schneeberger are both wrong. Idiots!!! They must think Thompson is from another well known liberal denomination that has Church of Christ as a small part of its larger name. Not knowing the history of religion in Tennessee, they are probably unaware that the Church of Christ here is a wholly different denomination that formed in the 1800's---I believe as breakaway Baptists if memory serves. The breakaway was led by a man with the surname Campbell. When I was growing up, some of the old folks in my family referred to the members of that church derisively as "Campbellites) (pronounced locally as the "Camel Lights" like the cigarette).
The Campbellites believe that their church is the one, true, and only Church of Christ on the planet. Everyone else, including Dobson and Schneeberger, attend churches whose members are walking down the highway to hell. They believe it is sinful to play musical instruments in church, so everyone just sings without musical accompaniment. They are extremely conservative in many other respects, refusing even to say "darn" because they think it is just masked cussing.
I guess the point that I am trying to make here is that these Churches of Christ and the people who attend them are arguably far more conservative than even Dobson, Falwell, Robertson, and the like. Many of my relatives on my dad's side of the family are members of this church. Upshot: Focus on the Family is dissing Thompson's religion out of total, unmitigated ignorance about their fellow ultra-conservatives religious background.
You know who else tries to divide their religion into "true believers" and "you're not a believer if your moderate"? Osama Bin Laden. His speeches are laced with statements about opposing the moderate muslims who 'aren't real muslims'. Fanatics, it seems, not only try to convert the people and the governments to their religion, but eliminate the moderate voices of their own religion.
We're sick and tired of fundamentalists defining who 's a good Christian, and who's not.
Don't a lot of non-fundie Catholics do the same thing?
Just ask Pope Benny "the Rat" Ratzinger if Dobson is a "good" Christian.
.
Well, I said at my blog, in response to a question on definitions, that a Christian was someone who believed in the "one God" and the resurrection of Jesus Christ. I said that, thinking that I was being inclusive because I've personally seen all these fights while growing up and didn't want to continue them, but they more on the biblical literalist side. So, if you're an agnostic and Christian (and I have heard that), I'll take you at your word that you're a Christian, but atheist and Christian - who knew? Not I, but I wouldn't contradict this person. However, that seems to make the term "Christian" meaningless. I don't know. Why call yourself one?
A few weeks ago in order to clarify a few things for readers on another blog, possummomma.blogspot.com, I asked Rev.Cook five questions, the answers to which I paste in here exactly as they landed in my e-mail.
Christianity encompasses so much more of the human experience than Christians typically acknowledge. This is not unexpected since most people rarely look beyond the borders of their own lives to guage "normal." This parochial view works for most people most of the time, but it essentially blinds one to what is accepted as "normal" outside their personal experience.
When Christians look out from their own little corner and they see "Christianity" plastered all about, they have the mistaken impression - the comfort of a familiar word notwithstanding - that that other Christianity is just like their own. Think of it in an Einsteinian relativity sense: what is measured as Christian standing in one frame of reference, will be different from what is measured as Christian in another.
No one should be surprised that many Christians are atheists. Now that people are less often directly killed or otherwise harmed by Christians for religious affronts, they are free to follow their own paths to knowledge, understanding, and intellectual satisfaction while retaining emotionally fulfulling ties to social and family religious tradition.
The questions I posed to Harry are simple though many will find it surprising that I asked them of a Christian clergyman. If the questions elicit surprise, wait 'til you read Harry's answers.
The questions:
1. You don't appear to exalt Jesus as divine, a
position more similar to we atheists than the
run-of-the-mill Christians, so how do you characterize
your thoughts about supernaturalism, especially as it
relates to religion?
2. If you do not hold Jesus sacred, how do you
justify remaining in the clergy?
3. What do you see as the function of the Christian
religion in people's lives, if Jesus is not divine?
4. Do you consider human morality to have a
supernatural source?
5. If you are free to do so, will you share the names
of others in the Christian clergy who share your
views?
Harry's answers:
1.Supernaturalism is phony-baloney stuff. Nature is enough for human beings to deal with. I give it no thought whatsoever.
2. Jesus didn't believe Hillel the Elder was sacred (or maybe you mean "divine.") And neither did most followers until the fathers of the Nicene Council decided by majority vote that such was so. There are plenty of us in the clergy who, on the basis of evidence and its research, that "Jesus" as he is variously depicted in the gospels is a fiction -- ok, a "sacred" fiction if you want.
3. Some one is on record in the early part of the First Century C.E. as having articulated a marvelous ethical vision of how human beings can live together in peace, security and opportunity. It's all summed up in the Jesus riff on Hillel's summary of Torah: WHAT YOU HATE, DO NOT DO TO ANOTHER or "do unto others..." The day that the critical mass of human beings adopt that wisdom and live by it is the day the world will be saved from itself. Maybe then I'll be ready to talk about the divinity of whoever said that stuff in the first place.
4. I do not consider morality or ethics to have a supernatural source. The celestial hand proffering the etched tablets to Charlton Heston (apparently unarmed at the time) is a metaphor representing the much longer and more difficult process the ancient Hebrews endured in figuring out how to keep people from killing each others. They figured out that if you made stealing taboo, fewer people would kill to get. And if you made envy taboo, few people would steal. Since it was the elders in the early tribes who figured out that stuff, it was necessary to mandate the honoring of father and mother, and after those early generations passed away, successor elders transferred the tribal honor to the spirits of the dead elders and, finally, to an unseen god whence the elders had come in the first place.
5. Try Ian Lawton at Christ Community Church in Spring Lake, Mich. I frankly don't know of many others.
Harry
Ever since Martin Luther set the stage for the Protestant Reformation, the (Christian) God Game has been to slice the God Pie thinly enough to collect your own group of followers.
Every slice had the "One True Way" to the Lord and (with very few exceptions - Perhaps the Shakers and the Mennonites) they all involve giving MONEY to the church.
Perhaps the time has come to give FTK a god she can relate to - I hear her church welcomes all denominations but they prefer the $100.00 bill.
FTK - give your computer to some charity - you aren't making any constructive use of it.
Hi! I thought you and your readers might be interested in some post-Easter news about Pope Benedict XVI...
The Pope's car is being auctioned off to raise money for Habitat for Humanity:
www.buyacarvideos.com/popecar.htm
The bidding is already more than $200,000! Personally, I think this is a really fun and creative way to raise
money. The auction goes until April 14th if you and your readers want to check it out.
Commenting by HaloScan
