No Christianity Isn’t Dying But It Is Under Attack

[GURPS]

No Christianity Isn’t Dying But It Is Under Attack

So The Daily Beast uses a homosexual activist who claims to be a Jewish rabbi but also teaches Buddhism to analyze why Christianity is dying. I mean what could possibly go wrong? In The Religious Right Is Right to Be Scared: Christianity Is Dying in America, C-list academic, Dr. Jay Michaelson, seeks to prove that claims that an attack on Christianity is underway are not only false but also the last gasp of a dying culture. He fails in both regards.

[clip]

One of the reason I read dross like this article, other than to provide fodder for posts, is that it is with monotonous regularity that you find people who claim there is no war against religion, that it is all some sort of retrograde right-wing boogeyman, inevitably end up proving that there is not only a war on religion but that it is not being waged with sufficient vigor for their taste. Michaelson is no different.

Unfortunately, even if the war on religion is fictive, the “defense” against it is very real and very harmful. This year alone, 17 states introduced legislation to protect “religious freedom” by exempting not just churches and religious organizations (including bogus ones set up to evade the law) from civil rights laws, domestic violence laws, even the Hippocratic Oath, but also but private individuals and for-profit businesses. Already, we’ve seen pediatricians turn children away because their parents are gay, and wife-abusers argue that it’s their religious duty to beat their spouses, and most notoriously that multimillion-dollar corporations like Hobby Lobby can have religious beliefs that permit them to refuse to provide health insurance to their employees on that basis.​

In one paragraph we see Michaelson state very clearly that a) religious belief has no place in society when it conflicts with prevailing social zeitgeist, b) puts using religious principles to run business or structure your family life out of bounds, and c) asserts that the state should be able to determine real vs.”bogus” religions.

 

[TheLibertonian]

Religious belief cannot override the constitutional rights of the citizens of the United States of America.

That was one of the reasons our nation was founded, you do realize? Because back in Europe, being guilty of being Catholic could get you killed. Or a protestant. or a protestant of the wrong type, ask the Puritans.

I would agree with the idea that Religion being the ultimate center of everything is under attack, but that is the purpose of the Free Market of Ideas.

Do you know the concept? Here, let me share it with you and anyone else interested, through metaphor

Two men are selling ideas at the market. One idea is that Christian Law should be the law of the land for everyone, regardless of their religious preferences, and of course, being a (picking a random name out of a hat here) Presbyterian, he thinks the only actual laws that should be enforced are the ones the Presbytes believe in, since all the other ones are just wrong really.

The other man is selling at the market the idea that Religious Law cannot have a place in a fair and equal government, especially one made up of so many different religions and peoples. After all we have Jews and Muslims and Buddhist and Zoastrians and Neo-Pagans and Druids and all sorts of different religious groups. Peoples religion is certainly important and must be protected, but so must everyone's rights.

The fact is, ideas sell and change over time. The Christians of a thousand year ago would probably barely recognize the religion you call Christianity today.

Now I've always been a free market sort of guy, and that includes in ideas, and just because an idea you support isn't doing well doesn't mean anyones cheating the system.

 

[ProximaCentauri]

Religious belief cannot override the constitutional rights of the citizens of the United States of America.

That was one of the reasons our nation was founded, you do realize? Because back in Europe, being guilty of being Catholic could get you killed. Or a protestant. or a protestant of the wrong type, ask the Puritans.

I would agree with the idea that Religion being the ultimate center of everything is under attack, but that is the purpose of the Free Market of Ideas.

.

Really? I would not characterize the gradual move away from religiosity toward secularism as Religion being "under attack". This "under attack" claim is a 'Religious Right' meme. The Religious Right sees it's power eroding with societal views of the US trending away from them, evidenced by the legalization of same sex marriage, the continued legality of abortion, and the rise of the non-religiously affiliated.

Christianity is not under attack. The Christian fundamentalist demographic in the US is trying to rally the troops, selling this false meme to contemporary Christians....and it's not working.

 

[PsyOps]

Really? I would not characterize the gradual move away from religiosity toward secularism as Religion being "under attack". This "under attack" claim is a 'Religious Right' meme. The Religious Right sees it's power eroding with societal views of the US trending away from them, evidenced by the legalization of same sex marriage, the continued legality of abortion, and the rise of the non-religiously affiliated.

Christianity is not under attack. The Christian fundamentalist demographic in the US is trying to rally the troops, selling this false meme to contemporary Christians....and it's not working.

Yup! You said it… the moral decline of this country is evident in the eroding ‘power’ of Christianity. It’s good to see you antis finally fessing up to what is ailing this country.

Let’s make sure we add to this: increase in child crimes, increase in mass murders, a growing desensitizing to death, larger acceptance of evil like Sharia, the elimination of gender identifications, a growing eroding of our liberties… do I need to go on?

 

[TheLibertonian]

I'm not anti-Christian in any way. I simply don't believe there's an interventionist deity looking over my shoulder watching out for me, or alternatively, waiting to punish me.

In fact I don't even deny that a God-like being could exist. There are more things between heaven and hell then can be dreamt of in our philosophies, after all.

And, you're wrong. We live in one of the safest most peaceful eras in the history of the planet, period. Violent crime is DOWN across the board.

Elimination of gender identification? And who am I to give a crap about what someone else calls themselves? I have no right to legalize morality or ethics to that point.

And how exactly is the "growing eroding of our liberties" anything to do with Secularism? for nearly 1000 years we had the Catholic Church and the Divine Monarchies, so any sort of drivvel that "christianity means freedom!" is flat out a lie. Christianity bends a lot of way, it can be in support of freedom, it can be against freedom.

Remember, the Europeans bought hundreds of thousands of black Africans as chattel slaves, reducing them to animals. And they did this while going to church, while reading their bibles, while praising gods name for the bounties showed upon them.

 

[LC_Sulla]

I'm not anti-Christian in any way. I simply don't believe there's an interventionist deity looking over my shoulder watching out for me, or alternatively, waiting to punish me.

In fact I don't even deny that a God-like being could exist. There are more things between heaven and hell then can be dreamt of in our philosophies, after all.

And, you're wrong. We live in one of the safest most peaceful eras in the history of the planet, period. Violent crime is DOWN across the board.

Elimination of gender identification? And who am I to give a crap about what someone else calls themselves? I have no right to legalize morality or ethics to that point.

And how exactly is the "growing eroding of our liberties" anything to do with Secularism? for nearly 1000 years we had the Catholic Church and the Divine Monarchies, so any sort of drivvel that "christianity means freedom!" is flat out a lie. Christianity bends a lot of way, it can be in support of freedom, it can be against freedom.

Remember, the Europeans bought hundreds of thousands of black Africans as chattel slaves, reducing them to animals. And they did this while going to church, while reading their bibles, while praising gods name for the bounties showed upon them.

This is a great post.

 

[This_person]

Remember, the Europeans bought hundreds of thousands of black Africans as chattel slaves,

Is there another kind?

reducing them to animals. And they did this while going to church, while reading their bibles, while praising gods name for the bounties showed upon them.

And, who sold those people into slavery? It wasn't Christians. And, who got those people out of slavery? It wasn't atheists.

 

[ProximaCentauri]

Yup! You said it… the moral decline of this country is evident in the eroding ‘power’ of Christianity. It’s good to see you antis finally fessing up to what is ailing this country.

Let’s make sure we add to this: increase in child crimes, increase in mass murders, a growing desensitizing to death, larger acceptance of evil like Sharia, the elimination of gender identifications, a growing eroding of our liberties… do I need to go on?

Let's see, I posted this...The Religious Right sees its power eroding with societal views of the US trending away from them, evidenced by the legalization of same sex marriage, the continued legality of abortion, and the rise of the non-religiously affiliated. And you claim I said this...'the moral decline of this country is evident in the eroding ‘power’ of Christianity'. Let me ask you...are blatant misrepresentations, essentially lying about what I said, fit with your 'godly' morals?

And as for your "additions" let's take a look at them:

"increase in child crimes" - are you referring to the thousands of children molested by Catholic Priests? Oops, sorry this doesn't fit with your Christian morality meme.

"increase in mass murders" - The data shows that numerous mass murders have been perpetrated by Christians. Furthermore, how many people have been murdered by that Christian values organization known as the KKK since their founding? The Army of God? How do the Christian affiliated hate groups in the US today fit with your 'Christian Morality' meme?

"larger acceptance of evil like Sharia" - Really? Is there any factual evidence for this? If so what is it?

"the elimination of gender identifications" - Ok, so you're LGBT phobic like many Christians. Unfortunately yes, this does fit with the 'Christian Morality' meme.

"a growing eroding of our liberties" - Do you mean the false liberties that Christians claim? As in, Christian business owners refusing to serve others because they are not like them? As well as Christian government officials refusing to grant others their civil rights?

No, you don't need to "go on"...old 'Christian' bigots like yourself just need to "go away".

 

[Midnightrider]

Is there another kind? And, who sold those people into slavery? It wasn't Christians. And, who got those people out of slavery? It wasn't atheists.

Oh the selective memory

How many atheists fought for the south? How about Christians?
Remember, Jesus approved of slavery.

 

[This_person]

Oh the selective memory

How many atheists fought for the south? How about Christians?
Remember, Jesus approved of slavery.

Wait, are you suggesting that different people have different views on religion!?! How astute of you!!

I believe, like so many things, there is some confusion on this topic.

"For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit."

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

"Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all."

It's certainly arguable that Jesus did not specifically prohibit slavery, and knew slavery was a part of the society of the time. It is equally true that there is no specific approval by Jesus on slavery (contrary to your position stated above).

However, in the name of Jesus, Paul does try to get a slave freed:

8 Therefore, although in Christ I could be bold and order you to do what you ought to do,
9 yet I prefer to appeal to you on the basis of love. It is as none other than Paul—an old man and now also a prisoner of Christ Jesus—
10 that I appeal to you for my son Onesimus, who became my son while I was in chains.
11 Formerly he was useless to you, but now he has become useful both to you and to me.
12 I am sending him—who is my very heart—back to you.
13 I would have liked to keep him with me so that he could take your place in helping me while I am in chains for the gospel.
14 But I did not want to do anything without your consent, so that any favor you do would not seem forced but would be voluntary.
15 Perhaps the reason he was separated from you for a little while was that you might have him back forever—
16 no longer as a slave, but better than a slave, as a dear brother. He is very dear to me but even dearer to you, both as a fellow man and as a brother in the Lord.
17 So if you consider me a partner, welcome him as you would welcome me.
18 If he has done you any wrong or owes you anything, charge it to me.
19 I, Paul, am writing this with my own hand. I will pay it back—not to mention that you owe me your very self.
20 I do wish, brother, that I may have some benefit from you in the Lord; refresh my heart in Christ.
21 Confident of your obedience, I write to you, knowing that you will do even more than I ask.
22 And one thing more: Prepare a guest room for me, because I hope to be restored to you in answer to your prayers.
23 Epaphras, my fellow prisoner in Christ Jesus, sends you greetings.
24 And so do Mark, Aristarchus, Demas and Luke, my fellow workers.
25 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit.

Now, this was in direct contradiction to the OT (see Deuteronomy 23:15-16). As is so common in the NT, Jesus does not say, "hey, don't follow this particular law anymore, but rather, I give you this new law" listed out line by line. Instead, through parable, action, and principle He changes the law. Paul, as noted above, directly violated the OT in Jesus' name, establishing a new law in that manner.

So, I guess you have to be as smart as the book you read (no smarter, looking for loopholes and contradictions, but no less smart deciding that what you think is more important than what's on the paper).

This is, as with most religious discussion, certainly up for differing opinions. What's not open for differing opinions is fact, and the fact is Jesus never said, "Hellz, yeah, slavery is soooo ####ing hot and if you love Me you'll keep as many people slaves as you possibly can", nor did He say, "I fully oppose each and every type of slavery at all times and under all circumstances".

Paul said, "do this voluntarily, because you're really better than being a slave owner." And, it is repeatedly said that slaves are one in Christ as a free person. So, we've got that going for us.

 

[Midnightrider]

Wait, are you suggesting that different people have different views on religion!?! How astute of you!!

I believe, like so many things, there is some confusion on this topic.



It's certainly arguable that Jesus did not specifically prohibit slavery, and knew slavery was a part of the society of the time. It is equally true that there is no specific approval by Jesus on slavery (contrary to your position stated above).

However, in the name of Jesus, Paul does try to get a slave freed:

Now, this was in direct contradiction to the OT (see Deuteronomy 23:15-16). As is so common in the NT, Jesus does not say, "hey, don't follow this particular law anymore, but rather, I give you this new law" listed out line by line. Instead, through parable, action, and principle He changes the law. Paul, as noted above, directly violated the OT in Jesus' name, establishing a new law in that manner.

So, I guess you have to be as smart as the book you read (no smarter, looking for loopholes and contradictions, but no less smart deciding that what you think is more important than what's on the paper).

This is, as with most religious discussion, certainly up for differing opinions. What's not open for differing opinions is fact, and the fact is Jesus never said, "Hellz, yeah, slavery is soooo ####ing hot and if you love Me you'll keep as many people slaves as you possibly can", nor did He say, "I fully oppose each and every type of slavery at all times and under all circumstances".

Paul said, "do this voluntarily, because you're really better than being a slave owner." And, it is repeatedly said that slaves are one in Christ as a free person. So, we've got that going for us.

No, I am suggesting that the south was mostly Christians and that the fought for slavery. So you are not confused, I make this contention to rebuke your inference that Christians were responsible for freeing the slaves.

BTW, the argument can be made that the American slaves were freed in spite of Christianity not because of it.

 

[This_person]

No, I am suggesting that the south was mostly Christians and that the fought for slavery. So you are not confused, I make this contention to rebuke your inference that Christians were responsible for freeing the slaves.

BTW, the argument can be made that the American slaves were freed in spite of Christianity not because of it.

It could be argued that they fought for state's rights, not slavery. It could be argued that the people they fought were fighting g against slavery based on Christian values.

What can't be argued is that there is nowhere Jesus approved explicitly of slavery.

 

[PsyOps]

No, you don't need to "go on"...old 'Christian' bigots like yourself just need to "go away".

What specifically have I done to earn the badge of 'bigot'? Or do you just like throwing that word around when real retorts fail you?

I won't be going away, sorry. But I know it's what you anti-Christian tyrants would love to make happen. Talk about 'bigots'!

 

[TheLibertonian]

Is there another kind? And, who sold those people into slavery? It wasn't Christians. And, who got those people out of slavery? It wasn't atheists.

The point was that Christianity and liberty and not synonyms.

Also yes, there are several different types of slavery, ranging from the historic to the modern. Chattel slavery is the most widely known in America because that's the kind that was used here.

 

[ProximaCentauri]

What specifically have I done to earn the badge of 'bigot'? Or do you just like throwing that word around when real retorts fail you?

No, I don't throw that term around lightly, in your case it's well deserved. And I responded, point by point, to your ridiculous assertions, that are typical of your worldview.

I won't be going away, sorry. But I know it's what you anti-Christian tyrants would love to make happen. Talk about 'bigots'!

Sorry, calling out your bigotry does not make be a bigot. I wouldn't say you're the king of the bigots here on the good ole SOMD forums, but the mentality you portray lines up quite well with the southern white supremacist evangelical.

"Anti-Christian tyrants", please don't make me laugh

And btw, your generation is on its way out, so it appears you will be going away

 

[Bird Dog]

No, I don't throw that term around lightly, in your case it's well deserved. And I responded, point by point, to your ridiculous assertions, that are typical of your worldview.



Sorry, calling out your bigotry does not make be a bigot. I wouldn't say you're the king of the bigots here on the good ole SOMD forums, but the mentality you portray lines up quite well with the southern white supremacist evangelical.

"Anti-Christian tyrants", please don't make me laugh

And btw, your generation is on its way out, so it appears you will be going away

So will you and so will I.............
.....but I think I have the better deal....

 

[Midnightrider]

It could be argued that they fought for state's rights, not slavery. It could be argued that the people they fought were fighting g against slavery based on Christian values.

What can't be argued is that there is nowhere Jesus approved explicitly of slavery.

You could argue those things, and they would be disingenuous BS, but go ahead.

As for Jesus' approval of slavery, it is explicit through his actions. Jesus presumably interacted with thousands or slaves in his lifetime, yet he didn't free a single one. Jesus' words are for slaves to obey their masters and for masters to be just. There is no 'confusion' about Jesus' position on slavery.

 

[Bird Dog]

You could argue those things, and they would be disingenuous BS, but go ahead.

As for Jesus' approval of slavery, it is explicit through his actions. Jesus presumably interacted with thousands or slaves in his lifetime, yet he didn't free a single one. Jesus' words are for slaves to obey their masters and for masters to be just. There is no 'confusion' about Jesus' position on slavery.

...and the issue is?

 

[ProximaCentauri]

So will you and so will I.............
.....but I think I have the better deal....

Don't be too sure. If there is a hell, it's doubtful a racist dicks like yourself will be left out.

 

[Bird Dog]

Don't be too sure. If there is a hell, it's doubtful a racist dicks like yourself will be left out.

I guess we are all bigots and racists if we disagree with you and MR.

Paranoid much.......I thought this thread was about Christianity......