I was raised Christian. As a teenager, I carefully looked at what I believed, and realized that my moral values were at odds with what I was being taught. So I stopped, and fortunately my parents were liberal enough to allow that. (I disagree virulently with my mom on some religious issues, and she still supports me, bless 'er.) For a while, I was angrily opposed to Christianity; the monster of a meme that grew and mutated from the teachings of one book. But I gave that up. But I've had to reevaluate it again, and not a little is because of you. I'm starting to see Christianity as something that must be opposed, because evils are being committed in its name. And if it comes to it, I will fight on your side.
Militant otters unite! Nibble their ankles! Eat their fish! :)
Seriously, I'm really not down on all Christianity. What ariston and his crowd seems to have misses is that all religions have traditions of accommodating to their surroundings and, yes, even creatively reinterpreting Scripture with each new generation. The idea that there's no legitimacy in this is, IMHO, absurd -- as is the idea that the traditionalists are putting zero spin on Scripture, even as they emphasize it in ways (e.g. fixating on gender and sexual morality) that are truer to American revivalism than they are to early Church Christianity. So basically, I guess what I'm saying is that as a rule, I'm just fine with the kinds of Christianity that Ariston hates. :)
Rawr! Otters are ferocious when roused, you know. The conclusion that I am coming to is that militant Christianity is attempting to enforce its moral code upon EVERYONE, even the bits of it that they can't justify except by appeal to authority, which any Forensics major will tell you is bad argument. Most of us are content to live and let live. The pagans, spiritualists, Discordians, atheists, agnostics, more liberal Christians and so on are happy to tend their own gardens; but the crusade going on to establish the ultra-conservative variety of Christianity that's going on must be opposed. Ideally, they should be beaten back so badly that we never again as a nation consider the idea of legislating 'values'.
For the most part, so did I! My mom tried to go back to her Catholic roots when I was six or seven, and we attended Sunday school for a while. It was a disaster. I got as far as my First Communion, but soon afterwards my dad had his first heart attack. To make a long story short, one of the nuns dared to gave my mom a lecture about "priorities" because we skipped school to visit my father. Ever since then, I've had the rare honor of being able to say "my mom is so fearless she's been known to threaten to punch nuns." :)
Wow. :o) Hear hear; all of that so perfectly sums up my whole feelings on the situation that I feel like this is something I could see myself writing, other than the personal details and the fact that you're a much better writer. ;o
( ... )
The thing about religion is... Well, lets just take it on faith that there is a God and he did proclaim all these various laws and that they were all correctly documented in the (original) books of the bible, or whatever. That is, assume that there's one "correct" way to worship.
Now, even in Christianity/Catholacism, there's... what? At least a few dozen subdivisions (e.g. "southern baptist"... even though that one (and most others, I'd bet) have further subdivisions), each with it's own particulars about how to worship and behave, and whatnot.
And then, on top of that, there's a few hundred other religions in the world, all of which have their own rules and regulations and whatnot (Yeah, religions have a lot of whatnots).
... and if you listen to most religions, their way of worship is the only right way to worship. Which means that out of the hundreds or thousands of religions in the world, only followers of one of them is going to go to heaven (or whatever their religion's equivilent is, if any), assuming a single one even has
( ... )
Comments 45
But I've had to reevaluate it again, and not a little is because of you. I'm starting to see Christianity as something that must be opposed, because evils are being committed in its name. And if it comes to it, I will fight on your side.
Reply
Seriously, I'm really not down on all Christianity. What ariston and his crowd seems to have misses is that all religions have traditions of accommodating to their surroundings and, yes, even creatively reinterpreting Scripture with each new generation. The idea that there's no legitimacy in this is, IMHO, absurd -- as is the idea that the traditionalists are putting zero spin on Scripture, even as they emphasize it in ways (e.g. fixating on gender and sexual morality) that are truer to American revivalism than they are to early Church Christianity. So basically, I guess what I'm saying is that as a rule, I'm just fine with the kinds of Christianity that Ariston hates. :)
Reply
The conclusion that I am coming to is that militant Christianity is attempting to enforce its moral code upon EVERYONE, even the bits of it that they can't justify except by appeal to authority, which any Forensics major will tell you is bad argument.
Most of us are content to live and let live. The pagans, spiritualists, Discordians, atheists, agnostics, more liberal Christians and so on are happy to tend their own gardens; but the crusade going on to establish the ultra-conservative variety of Christianity that's going on must be opposed. Ideally, they should be beaten back so badly that we never again as a nation consider the idea of legislating 'values'.
Reply
And I don't think I disagree with a single word of this post... lemme double check... Nope. You are so right about it all.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
I'd use the same tone in "Unfortunately, I never really got mathematics or physics, and I have no desire to. Does that make me a bad person geek?"
Reply
Reply
Now, even in Christianity/Catholacism, there's... what? At least a few dozen subdivisions (e.g. "southern baptist"... even though that one (and most others, I'd bet) have further subdivisions), each with it's own particulars about how to worship and behave, and whatnot.
And then, on top of that, there's a few hundred other religions in the world, all of which have their own rules and regulations and whatnot (Yeah, religions have a lot of whatnots).
... and if you listen to most religions, their way of worship is the only right way to worship. Which means that out of the hundreds or thousands of religions in the world, only followers of one of them is going to go to heaven (or whatever their religion's equivilent is, if any), assuming a single one even has ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment