[ SECRET POST #3035 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3035 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.














Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 081 secrets from Secret Submission Post #434.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Since it's Sunday

[sarillia]

I have to say, I've had more atheists tell me I'm not a real Christian than even the most fundamentalist of Christians. I don't really understand it. I don't see why following all the rules is a distinguishing feature. I'm an American no matter how many of the laws of this country I break. And I'm a Christian because I'm a follower of Jesus Christ. You could argue that I'm a bad one but I still am one.

I'm not offended by this, I just really don't understand why people looking in on the outside of religions find every single rule to be such an essential part of the definition. I have Jewish friends who have the same problems with non-Jews getting on their case for not keeping kosher.

Plus I agree that the bible is contradictory. But that makes it impossible to follow all the rules. Wouldn't that mean that no one is a Real Christian if we're going by these rules? I just don't see the point in defining it that way.

Re: Since it's Sunday

[(Anonymous)]

Anon from below.

It's not about being a good one or a bad one, it's more about picking and choosing. American is not a good analogy because it's a legal status and not something one has to opt into being. Would you call a feminist who claims to be for gender equality but opts to think trans people are mentally ill or ignore black women or rage against random men "a true feminist, just a bad one"? She's still for gender equality, though!

At some point, you have to say "you don't fit any more," and following the respective Book is one of the core tenets of lots of theist religions.

Re: Since it's Sunday

[sarillia]

Yeah I knew American was a bad analogy but I'm too tired to think of a good one.

Actually I do think a feminist like that is still a feminist. There's a long tradition of racism and transphobia and other nasty things in influential feminist writing and activity. I don't want to associate with them but they are feminists.

I know there's a point where someone just doesn't fit a definition anymore, but before that often comes the No True Scotsman Argument.

I still don't see how I can be called anything other than a Christian when my god is the person that the religion is named for. What do you propose I call myself instead if I'm breaking too many of the rules Paul and the others laid down? I still wonder if there's even such a thing as a Real Christian under this definition when there are so many little rules that only smaller sects follow, like women covering their hair when they pray.

Re: Since it's Sunday

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

I'm not sure, as I don't subscribe to either side. I'm trying to explain it as I've heard friends who do subscribe to the anti-theist side explain it.

Would you call someone "Christian" who claims they follow Christ but believes nothing of the Bible and thinks the whole thing is a load of bull? Or would you say following the holy book is a core tenet of being a Christian that can't be ignored?

Re: Since it's Sunday

[(Anonymous)]

but the question of "What the Holy Book says and what that means" is by no means something that can be taken as a given!!!

Re: Since it's Sunday

[dethtoll]

Then what's the point? If your own religion is self-contradictory and requires interpretation to function and nothing can be taken as a given, then why even follow it?

I guess that explains all the schisms and sects, though.

Re: Since it's Sunday

[(Anonymous)]

Well, there are a million reasons, I suppose, but I would imagine the most basic is because you think it's true.

Re: Since it's Sunday

[sarillia]

I think it doesn't matter if someone calls themselves a Christian but somehow "isn't really". I don't see what I get out of calling someone fake or whatever. I think it's up to Jesus to decide who is a Christian and who isn't.

To answer your particular example, I actually know people who call themselves Christian but see the whole thing as a metaphor and don't believe a single bit of it is literal truth. I have no problem calling them Christians since they feel that colors their actions and world view enough for them to take on that label.

I think the holy book has to not be mandatory since people couldn't read it for so long. I doubt people before the invention of the printing press and widespread education were hearing every single rule from their local priests or ministers.

Total outsider perspective here . . .

[feotakahari]

But the way I see it is that it comes down to how good a person you are. People who try to follow everything in the Bible often make a really bad impression on me--it seems like they care more about the letter of the rules than the spirit. People who just try to follow general Christian values like mercy and charity often seem a lot nicer to me.

(I have the same attitude towards strict and lax Wiccans, but that's another shitstorm.)

Re: Total outsider perspective here . . .

[(Anonymous)]

My personal judgment of a person would depend entirely on how good of a person they were regardless of religiosity, I agree.

I don't think "how good a person you are" is in any way related to "how religious a person you are" or "how true of a Christian/Muslim/Wiccan/other" you are, though.

Re: Total outsider perspective here . . .

[sarillia]

I definitely think that's the more important thing. I keep wondering why people even care if someone fits their definition of a religion they don't follow. But then that's pretty hypocritical of me since I think about all kinds of things that people could say don't really matter.

Re: Since it's Sunday

[(Anonymous)]

The problem is that there's so much complexity in the interpretations of the various Books - and so much validity on most sides of the argument - that it's extremely difficult for me to say which interpretations fundamentally are and are not valid, especially as someone outside of the religion. How are you going to say which symbolic readings and which textual variants are and aren't valid?

Certainly, there are probably some people for whom it's true that they don't really care about the tenets. But there's also a lot of justificatory arguments on all sides of most of these questions, and I at least don't see the need to be an arbiter there.

Like, just because someone has to make an argument for a reading or a position, that doesn't mean it's a stretch. I think there's a lot of care and thought in those arguments (at least, when those arguments are at their best) which this line of thought tends to skim over.

Re: Since it's Sunday

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

Yup, I'm agreed with you on all that. This isn't a stance I hold myself, I'm more apathetic toward it all. I grew up with the opposite extreme religious version of the same with family that called other self-identified Christians not True Christians (see below thread). I was just trying to explain the anti-theist stance the way I've heard it from friends who hold it.

Re: Since it's Sunday

[(Anonymous)]

Ah, sorry, I definitely took you to be advancing the theory yourself.

No, I agree, that's definitely the idea that's out there. I just don't agree with it.

Re: Since it's Sunday

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

Ha, I see how it looks that way since my initial reply was the thread below and this one blew up a little bit, lol.

Re: Since it's Sunday

[dethtoll]

I kind of do feel that way, yeah. It's impossible to be a Christian as described in the Bible, but if the Bible is supposed to be the blueprint for Christianity, the guidebook, or any other of the zillion platitudes I've heard used to describe it, then why is it essentially impossible to follow on a legal, moral and logical level? And of course, you could argue that it's up for interpretation but the Bible itself says it's not up for interpretation -- but interpretation is the only way to make it work. Let alone deciding whether some or all of it is up for interpretation, or even which parts.

I was a Christian for years and went to Catholic school and even then I wondered why after 2000+ years nobody's successfully straightened this mess out.

Re: Since it's Sunday

[sarillia]

I can't speak for people who consider the bible a blueprint or whatever. I don't feel that way. The bible was compiled by humans who were influenced by cultural context and the limits of the human mind. I take what feels true to me and pray on it and that's enough for me.

Someday I would like to really study the bible though. I've read English translations, but I'd love to read what's survived of the original text since there's so much politics in why certain things got translated the way they did.

Re: Since it's Sunday

[diet_poison]

I just want to say both how much your comments resonated with me and my views in this thread (like, a lot!) which is really cool, and also how much I respect you for your beliefs, your confidence in sharing them, and your civility in conversation. :)

Re: Since it's Sunday

[sarillia]

Thanks. I'm always happy to hear that my comments are appreciated. It's funny you mention confidence. I don't even know where that comes from. I can be the most insecure person in the world and then in another conversation I'm just "lol whatever, they can think what they want".

Re: Since it's Sunday

[diet_poison]

Part of it is probably just the internet and the way your tone comes across in your comments, which may be quite different from the way you are when you speak! You generally seem pretty put-together and sure of yourself here. Anyway, sometimes you gotta fake it 'til you make it, eh?

Re: Since it's Sunday

[diet_poison]

And I'm a Christian because I'm a follower of Jesus Christ.

^^^^^^^^^

Jesus =/= the Bible, the Bible was compiled long after Jesus' time on Earth and hearing people who are religious claim that you have to follow the whole Bible to fit the definition of "Christian" is annoying enough.

Re: Since it's Sunday

[sarillia]

I think I'm finally starting to understand that while this is what I mean when I say I'm a Christian, other people hear it and primarily understand it as "I'm a follower of the Christian bible". I don't think it makes sense to base it on the bible considering its history and the history of literacy, but at least now it makes sense that people would consider that such an important part of the definition.

Re: Since it's Sunday

[diet_poison]

Yeah. And to be fair, that gets reinforced by so many Christians being adamant that you have to follow the Bible (all of it) to be a real Christian - no wonder other people think that since our own religion-mates push it so hard. (I've definitely had this argument with a few of my more fundie friends...)

Re: Since it's Sunday

[sarillia]

I've had it too. These days I mostly stick to telling them it's not our place to judge these things rather than breaking out the examples of rules they're not following or different ways of interpreting various texts.

Re: Since it's Sunday

[diet_poison]

You know I've done that and it's like they have a mental block from accepting it. I have one fundie friend who rants about how sinful homosexuality is along with other stuff that's mentioned in the OT. I've asked her multiple times if she eats pork but she never responds. It's like she doesn't even process it. o.O

You're probably taking the wiser path. I'm just so bloody stubborn...