Has Christianity just become a trend in modern day society?

[SapphireSeaBird]

Well, this debate is probably going to start some Christian vs Athiest arguements and the like, and I'll probably regret starting it in the first place, but this is something I have been wondering for a while now.
Perhaps it's just where I live in particular, but it seems to me that a lot of people - not everyone, but some - teenagers in particular, have simply become Christian because it's now a "cool" thing to do. Call me cynical, but I've met a lot of people who say they are Christian, and go to youth groups and CU and the like, but they sure don't act like it. Another thing that bothers me is when they act like they're above everyone else, just because they are Christian.

So what do other people think? Am I just being narrow minded? Or does anyone agree?

[jordanisonfire]

http://i52.tinypic.com/5l31nr.jpg

[Bowie20049]

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee240/Lambo177/Get%20Those%20Gifs/AndHereWeGo.gif

[Schooner]

I don't think you're being narrow-minded, but where I live, people really know and care about their religion. Then again, they're are some people who have really different different views (they're used to be this kid in my school who would bash on Christianity and preach about evolution and the Christian kids would sing church songs at him) Then again, even the Lutherns and the Catholics are spewing stuff at each other most of the time. So, I don't think that everyone follows Christianity just because it's "cool." At least not where I come from. But some people don't really respect eachother's views and opinions and that's what really pisses me off. I think that everyone should be more open-minded.

[Shaun]

Honestly, the short answer to this is: this isn't new. Folks running around saying they're Christian and not acting all that "Christian" (depending on how you define that term) has been going on for centuries. It's not really a trend so much as a continuation of the same-old same-old. People join up because it's "the norm" and yet have no concept of what that means.

None of my kids will be like that, though...atheist ninjas the whole lot.

[Faust]

Ah yes, I also am intrested in modern religon. Here is my argument that religon is still as fresh as ever:

Some people nowadays still do crazy religous things like burning several sacred muslim books,sucide bombs and mass murders which shows that people still have serious religous feelings.

This all I can but in now because I'm not a good long writer.Good day religous people.

[Peppermental]

Good day religious people? Can you read?

But yur, there are still crazy bible followers who do shit with snakes. But like Shaun says, the giant mass that is christain, for the most part, has been only christian in name and moral code for the last few centuries.

[Anira]

While I agree with Shaun, I do want to point out the mention of Atheism in this fourm and that I read a really interesting article recently. This article pointed out that in our modern society more people are atheistic or agnostic now. This rise in atheism/agnostisim (is that even the correct word?) is directly related to the huge scientific discoveries and breakthroughs happening every day. So many people who are "religious" (Christian or not) are losing the sense of faith whether or not the conciously realize it. ((According to the article)). Yeah. Just putting that out there.

[Peppermental]

Now pagans, they're still going strong

[Rage]

None of my kids will be like that, though...atheist ninjas the whole lot.

Mhmmmmmmm, that was awesome. :sarcasm:

[SapphireSeaBird]

But some people don't really respect eachother's views and opinions and that's what really pisses me off.
Same here, it's up to each individual what they want to believe, nobody else has the right to judge that... But it just annoys me when I see "Christians" who think they're cooler than everyone else going round, in school for example, and bullying the unpopular kids and bitching about everyone behind their backs.

[ScottyMcGee]

I find the complete opposite. Everywhere I go I see more and more friends getting into atheism or agnosticism because it's "cool".

[Belial]

religion is not nessesary to society, in the since that religion only creates conflict. besides why bellieve in something that has no proof. I personally believe in evolution, and many religious people have a problem with evolution, even though they dont know anything about it. and the only thing they have to argue with is that "WE dont come from monkeys". seriously, learn about what your arguing against before you argue.

[Peppermental]

pseudo-intellectualism is the real trend. its gross.

[DarkRaven]

Well, this debate is probably going to start some Christian vs Athiest arguements and the like, and I'll probably regret starting it in the first place, but this is something I have been wondering for a while now.
Perhaps it's just where I live in particular, but it seems to me that a lot of people - not everyone, but some - teenagers in particular, have simply become Christian because it's now a "cool" thing to do. Call me cynical, but I've met a lot of people who say they are Christian, and go to youth groups and CU and the like, but they sure don't act like it. Another thing that bothers me is when they act like they're above everyone else, just because they are Christian.

So what do other people think? Am I just being narrow minded? Or does anyone agree?

If anything the opposite is true for Ireland. While a few of my friends are Opus Deii, ours is the first generation to kick off the shackles of the Roman Catholic Church. The child abuse scandals is what really started to give the Church a bad name in the 1990s.

[crayons932]

I follow a religion called apatheism, which basically means that I don't really care either way, because it doesn't affect me. People worshiping this god affect me, but not god himself. In other words, it's called the "just take another cookie" belief, which means that we shouldn't really get worked up about this, because whether god is real or not, I don't really care!! I do care if someone says they have a right to kill in god's name, but when it comes down to beliefs, I just take another cookie :)

[SapphireSeaBird]

I think people are kind of missing the point...
Maybe I didn't put myself across very well, but what I'm trying to say is, do you think that some people are just calling themselves Christian because that's what they're friends are doing, and they feel that's what they have to do to fit in?

[DarkRaven]

Maybe I didn't put myself across very well, but what I'm trying to say is, do you think that some people are just calling themselves Christian because that's what they're friends are doing, and they feel that's what they have to do to fit in?

That was me when I was 12, but when I turned 14 or 15 I kind of realised that I no longer believed in it at all. I hadn't for years before that, but my teachers and friends criticised me any time I opened my mouth to say that science contradicted it.

All of them are atheists now too. I think I was the first to openly say that I didn't believe in God any longer though.

[Kitty]

It does bug me that people are, as I've heard put it before, practical atheists and yet don't realize it. You live like an atheist, or any other religion truly, but atheist works in what I've seen, and then for the church service, you are a Christian, you pray to God, you donate to the church while dressed in your Sunday best and sing along with everyone else. But you don't live like a Christian. During the week you don't pray, you don't remember God. And that can also be because people think it's cool to 'trash Christians' 'Trash Jews' 'Trash Muslims' 'Trash Atheists' So you have the opposite effect to, people leaving the religion due to social pressures.

But I have seen people being one religion because it's 'cool' or 'all my friends are doing it, why not me too?' or just to be part of the 'in' crowd, take the bar mitzvah people in the Jewish culture have at 13. I know people who talked about having one back then when they just wanted the party, (I'm not going to pretend I know quite a lot about how it all works not being Jewish, but I do know of the celebration).

But I think at all times and all places you'll have people becoming religious for 'the wrong reasons' be it for money, fame or just street cred.

So in a way to answer the question, people are and then people are actually coming to believe in the religion and this 'fad' everyone is into helped them become a part of the religion. Though the opposite is happening too.

[DarkRaven]

The Roman Catholic Church in Ireland might be partly responsible for that. If you're an alter server, or sing at the choir in your local church, or play music for it, or decorate the Church, they often pay for you to go on days out to places, or to even go to World Youth Day. Essentially, they're bribing you to stay with the Church.

Now I know a lot of people who do those kinds of things, that genuinely believe in Catholicism... but still a lot of them are in it, because they get free days out with their friends. There are also a lot of girls who really enjoy singing, and want to do it in College. Church choirs are one way to get a scholarship.

But that said, those people are a minority. Most young people are so apathetic about religion, that they don't bother to go to Church on Sundays, even if the rest of their family do.

[sayuri]

Personally, I think it is more that people are just not as religious right now but their parents were Christian. I'm a baptized Catholic but I haven't gone to church in forever. And this may sound silly but I know a few people that go through the Catholic sacraments just so they can get married in the church, which is pretty reasonable in my opinion. So no, I don't think being Christian is trendy, I think it's just expected and not really a lifestyle (for some people).

[Eilidh]

I'm a Catholic. Technically. But I haven't went to Church since I was about five (Well apart from Weddings, Funerals, with the school blahdeblah), so I wouldn't really say I'm a very good one. I go to a Catholic school and pretty much no one goes to Church or well, acts the way you'd expect a Catholic to.

[Wolfie]

I was babtized as a Presbyterian, but I've never really believed in the teachings. It's just never felt logical to me. I pretty much go to church because I'll be grounded for a week if I don't, rather than because I want to. In my youth group, there are about twenty kids there because it's envigorating socially. They don't really care about church, but the people that are there and the trips they go on. In my school, it's considered cool if you go to youth groups like the Edge or the Point every Wednesday, but the people that are there turn out to be highly narrow-minded and obsessed with using the time for gossip or getting together.

[Peppermental]

Where you live, youth groups are for cool kids? Wtf mindblown

[SapphireSeaBird]

In my youth group, there are about twenty kids there because it's envigorating socially. They don't really care about church, but the people that are there and the trips they go on.

That's the same as where I'm from. I don't go to any youth groups, but I have friends who do and basically it's just a social gathering.

Where you live, youth groups are for cool kids? Wtf mindblown

Where I live, the kids who go to youth groups think they're awesome because they go. There are some really popular youth groups, and the people that go to these are the top of the food chain. Next down are ones that go to less "cool" youth groups, and bottom of the chain are the ones likes me who don't go to anything. It's particularly noticeable in my school, because the youth groups are how most people got know each other to begin with.

Society in my town is messed up xD

[Peppermental]

so.... there aren't parties are anything?

[SapphireSeaBird]

There still are... Why would youth groups mean no parties? :L

[Peppermental]

It just seems odd to me that the church would have something to do with the social scene among teenagers in this day and age. But I'm used to living in Cincinnati, maybe its different here.

[DarkRaven]

Where I live, the kids who go to youth groups think they're awesome because they go. There are some really popular youth groups, and the people that go to these are the top of the food chain. Next down are ones that go to less "cool" youth groups, and bottom of the chain are the ones likes me who don't go to anything. It's particularly noticeable in my school, because the youth groups are how most people got know each other to begin with.

Society in my town is messed up xD

How old are you? Because while I can understand that happening when you are 13-16, but by the time kids get around 17/18/19 they have other ways of socialising. Namely, parties where they get drunk and high as lords.

[SapphireSeaBird]

How old are you? Because while I can understand that happening when you are 13-16, but by the time kids get around 17/18/19 they have other ways of socialising. Namely, parties where they get drunk and high as lords.

I'm 15, and the people that go to the youth groups are usually anything from about 13-18, it's just while they're at school really.
But yeah I know what you mean, people tend to grow out of it as they get older - but that just goes to show they're only in it for the social aspect, not because they're really religious.

[Kitty]

At my old youth group I went to before moving out of the area was fun. We didn't have the bible as a huge part but as they were catering to middleschoolers, I guess it was getting us to show up was the point. They sold us candy too.:rolleyes:

I'll admit we did normally sit down and listen. But in a group of people there were times when barely anyone came, and as always, we talked American football or sports first, what was going on in town etc before we got to the game. We then did worship and since they had couchs and no one much cared what happened to them we were allowed to jump on them, within reason, went back for the bible lesson the milled around till parents showed up. It was primarily for social as some people's parents made them go, or it was a way for people whose parents banned social get-togethers a while after school to get together and have fun.

But all while the social is an important part of church. Why go if you don't like the Pastor, or you don't like the people there and do not get along with them? I think people interpret church as a purely social invent, and while it's not really 'what it's all about' it is still a part no matter what you believe.

But in my opinion, you're always going to have people like that. It's just always going to be at some point an 'in' thing or an 'out' thing. To me, there is always going to be people who go for 'the wrong reasons'.

[Eilidh]

It just seems odd to me that the church would have something to do with the social scene among teenagers in this day and age. But I'm used to living in Cincinnati, maybe its different here.

Yeah I'm the same as you, it's all just different cultures though.

[Jack]

Sponsored Links: "Catholic Church; fun new board game about electing the pope!"

/spam

[Write]

At my school ther are many different religions, and we don't really focuse on it. We'll talk about it, and we know who is what religion, but it doesn't manage are social status.

[MadeHartt]

you're not being narrow minded, i know people like that too and its very annoying. i think they just like to think they're sitting on a moral high horse.

[Clarissa]

I was in the church choir in my village (where, honestly, there's not much else to do). This was before I joined my current school, where it's chapel every morning and holy communion every other Wednesday. Anyways, I was there two, three times a week singing with people who were all very strong believers, and I, having beeen brought up atheist, felt completely out of place. It never really bothered me that much, until First Communion came up and all of my choir friends (chortle) were doing the preparations. I just wanted to fit in, so I was christened at the age of 12. My dad teased the hell out of me, being the supportive father that he is, and my extremely catholic grandmother was so happy she couldn't stop talking about religion with me. It was just a phase with me - I don't think I ever really 'believed', and I never did my First Communion.

Aw, pathetic sob story there. I did it as a sort of experiment, I suppose, and yes, it was more of a trend thing than an actual strong belief in religion. However, it's not that way with everything, and I'd say that in fact, the trend is atheism, what with all the scientific discoveries that make it harder and harder for God and the Universe to coexist.

This is slightly irrelevant, but a teacher at my school, when I tried to object to the morning chapel ritual on the grounds that I was atheist, told me that he "didn't believe I was old enough to make that decision". Apparently, 16 is old enough to make potentially life changing decisions, but not to choose a religion? Why am I Christian by default?

'nuff rambling. I don't think Christianity is a trend. It's still going strong, though not as strong as when it was the only socially acceptable way of thinking, but I don't really know anyone now who'd call themselves a Christian just to fit in...

[Jack]

This is slightly irrelevant, but a teacher at my school, when I tried to object to the morning chapel ritual on the grounds that I was atheist, told me that he "didn't believe I was old enough to make that decision". Apparently, 16 is old enough to make potentially life changing decisions, but not to choose a religion? Why am I Christian by default?
.

Lul, that's fucked up. Atheism should be the default.

/spam

[Bilbo]

Jack, that's only your opinion ;) .

I would say that people hardly even "become Christian" just to fit in, unless their family is made up of believers. I mean, it's not like many people will literally make fun of you for becoming an Atheist, since many religions are against things like "making fun of people".

But to say "Christianity has just become a trend", I would believe to be untrue. No doubt, there are Christian "trenders", so to speak, but you can only go so far by generalizing ;) .

[Jack]

Sorry, Bilbo, that's fact not opinion. You're not born believing in a diety/dieties, that only comes from the way you are brought up or your ventures in later life. ;)

[Iridescence]

This is slightly irrelevant, but a teacher at my school, when I tried to object to the morning chapel ritual on the grounds that I was atheist, told me that he "didn't believe I was old enough to make that decision". Apparently, 16 is old enough to make potentially life changing decisions, but not to choose a religion? Why am I Christian by default?


I think it's fucked up that this teacher thinks he can tell you how old you have to be before you can decide what you believe. How pretentious and primitive. Would it work the same way if a child were to declare that he/she is Christian? How are they old enough to make that decision?

Jack, that's only your opinion ;) .

I would say that people hardly even "become Christian" just to fit in, unless their family is made up of believers. I mean, it's not like many people will literally make fun of you for becoming an Atheist, since many religions are against things like "making fun of people".


Religions may not advocate "making fun of people," but they certainly don't hesitate to condemn ones that don't conform to their own guidelines, either. Being "made fun of" is the least of our problems. There are whole wars started that find their roots, in some way or another, in religion. I don't think it matters what the religion is against or for, since it's the ones following the religion that really make it what it is. And there are those that practice their religions that make fun of and condemn others freely and often. Especially atheists.
Ever read Life of Pi? The author of that book blatantly shows contempt for agnostics. Whether or not someone "literally makes fun of you" for becoming an atheist is irrelevant. Because when it comes to religious tolerance, we're still like cave people.

[Bilbo]

Sorry, Bilbo, that's fact not opinion. You're not born believing in a diety/dieties, that only comes from the way you are brought up or your ventures in later life. ;)

Actually, Jack, you're wrong, because you're not looking at it from the right perspective, nor are you looking at your original post :P .

You said that " Atheism should be the default ". Now, I agree that it is the default, but not that it should be. You see the difference?

And actually, I believe that some people were born believing in God, ( ex. John the Baptist) and I also believe that all people know that God is real, they just fight it.

But that's out of the question- as I said before, because you're an Atheist, people should be atheist at default, and because I'm a Christian, I believe that they should be Christian.

I think it's fucked up that this teacher thinks he can tell you how old you have to be before you can decide what you believe. How pretentious and primitive. Would it work the same way if a child were to declare that he/she is Christian? How are they old enough to make that decision?

It all depends on the family or school, Iri. I know some Christians who claim they're not going to tell their kid, even what to believe!

It all depends. Just like some Atheists may teach their children that Atheism is the absolute truth, some Christians/Catholics/Muslims-etc., will teach their kids what they believe to be the absolute truth.

And I have nothing wrong with a parent teaching a kid what they believe to be the absolute truth- if you believe something to be a fact, you want your kid to know about it.

Of course, forcing someone to believe won't do them an iota of good- it's not Biblical either.

Religions may not advocate "making fun of people," but they certainly don't hesitate to condemn ones that don't conform to their own guidelines, either.

This works the other way around, as you very well know.

Being "made fun of" is the least of our problems. There are whole wars started that find their roots, in some way or another, in religion.

True- does that mean that I agree with them? No. Generalizing all religions, all denominations of religions, all sects, ect., is far too much of a generalization.

My constant answer is: hate and pride starts wars. ( at least indirectly ) . Christianity promotes love to your enemies AND friends, and humility to the very extreme. ( ex. Jesus washing his disciples feet) .

So yes, some "Christians" may start wars, but they don't understand the Bible, and you can't group them with me.

I don't think it matters what the religion is against or for, since it's the ones following the religion that really make it what it is. And there are those that practice their religions that make fun of and condemn others freely and often. Especially atheists.
Ever read Life of Pi? The author of that book blatantly shows contempt for agnostics. Whether or not someone "literally makes fun of you" for becoming an atheist is irrelevant. Because when it comes to religious tolerance, we're still like cave people.

[Shaun]

if you believe something to be a fact, you want your kid to know about it.

That sentence contradicts itself. Nothing you believe is a fact. Facts are not founded on belief. They are as close to absolute as you can get. You don't believe the moon revolves around the Earth so much it becomes a fact. It just is a fact.

People who believe things to be facts are conflating observable reality with unfounded explanations for things. Facts just are.

True- does that mean that I agree with them? No. Generalizing all religions, all denominations of religions, all sects, ect., is far too much of a generalization.

My constant answer is: hate and pride starts wars. ( at least indirectly ) . Christianity promotes love to your enemies AND friends, and humility to the very extreme. ( ex. Jesus washing his disciples feet) .

So yes, some "Christians" may start wars, but they don't understand the Bible, and you can't group them with me.

This only works if there are significant numbers of Christian sects which have never had any involvement in war, discrimination, hate, etc. While individuals may not be involved in what the body politic, they still remain in groups of individuals who perform the acts you are condemning. If you really wanted to play the innocent man, you would leave any Christian sect which has or is practicing war, hate, discrimination, etc. And if you did that, you'd have very few places to go where you could still call yourself "Christian."

That and this is also a weasel-y way of getting out of dealing with the troubling relationship between religion and the awful things done in its name. The fact of the matter is that a great deal of religious people have done great amounts of harm to humanity in the name of their religion. This is a problem that needs dealing with. Saying "well, that's not me" isn't doing anything but avoiding the problem itself.

And actually, I believe that some people were born believing in God, ( ex. John the Baptist) and I also believe that all people know that God is real, they just fight it.

This is, to put it frankly, a pile of B.S. You cannot know something is real which cannot be proven to exist. I'd love to use an Easter Bunny reference here, but I'll stop for now...

[KnightinArmor02]

It really depends on the person, if a person was raised on the principals of christianity and faith the likeliness of the person using christianity as a trend is gonna be low, but if you get a person who wasnt really taught about christianity until his/her later years the likeliness of that happening is higher.

[Bilbo]

that sentence contradicts itself. Nothing you believe is a fact. Facts are not founded on belief. They are as close to absolute as you can get. You don't believe the moon revolves around the earth so much it becomes a fact. It just is a fact.

no, it doesn't shaun.

I believe that the moon exists.

That is an objective statement, meaning it cannot be true for me and not true for you. However, some people might say " i do not believe that the moon exists".

Facts are things that are objective. Opinions are more things that are subjective- "i'm cool", "blue is a nice color", etc.

Shaun, just because there can't be two contradictory facts, doesn't mean people can believe two contradictory things that claim to be facts, does it?

You logic seems a bit weak on this one.

people who believe things to be facts are conflating observable reality with unfounded explanations for things. Facts just are.

yes, facts are. Did you even understand what i said?

Shaun, i don't think you're getting the point.

Christian: God exists.

Atheist: God doesn't exist.

Both of these are objective statements. both of these people believe these contradictory objective statements to be true!

i'm not saying that belief affects facts- i never even implied that. I'm just saying that some people believe things that they believe to be facts, while other people believe contradictory things that they believe to be facts.

this only works if there are significant numbers of christian sects which have never had any involvement in war, discrimination, hate, etc. while individuals may not be involved in what the body politic, they still remain in groups of individuals who perform the acts you are condemning. If you really wanted to play the innocent man, you would leave any christian sect which has or is practicing war, hate, discrimination, etc. And if you did that, you'd have very few places to go where you could still call yourself "christian."

that is, honestly, ridiculous and insulting.

You can see that i put in bold your first statement- and a statement, i must say, that is blatantly ignorant, ridiculous, and without any proof to back it up.

You're telling me that, if people who called themselves "christian", once upon a time, started wars, then i must be ashamed of my religion and give it up, because i must be classifed with them?

Why? Because you said so? No, i don't think so.

Christianity is about jesus- if jesus practiced awful things, then you could say "the only thing to do now is to leave christianity". However, stating that the actions of other so-called "christians" should affect my belief is insulting.

Oh, look. Thousands of atheists who have been involved in discrimination and war! Shaun, leave atheism immediately!

that and this is also a weasel-y way of getting out of dealing with the troubling relationship between religion and the awful things done in its name. The fact of the matter is that a great deal of religious people have done great amounts of harm to humanity in the name of their religion. this is a problem that needs dealing with. Saying "well, that's not me" isn't doing anything but avoiding the problem itself.



so, shaun- the best way to deal with things is this way?

C(hristian) #1: I'm going to slaughter a man because i just mis-interpreted the bible.

C #2: Oh! You're giving christianity a bad name- i think i'll leave it, even though it's what i believe in, because i'm afraid of the idiots out there who enjoy generalizing me with him. Bye!

Shuan, every single one of the words you have spoken so far have been ignorant opinions.

This is, to put it frankly, a pile of b.s. You cannot know something is real which cannot be proven to exist. I'd love to use an easter bunny reference here, but i'll stop for now...

12 23 34

[Shaun]

no, it doesn't shaun.

I believe that the moon exists.

That is an objective statement, meaning it cannot be true for me and not true for you. However, some people might say " i do not believe that the moon exists".

Facts are things that are objective. Opinions are more things that are subjective- "i'm cool", "blue is a nice color", etc.

You've just proven my point for me. Belief can apply to anything, regardless of any factuality that might exist in any particular moment. The fact that something you believe in is a fact is separate from the act of believing in that thing. A fact is not incorrect. It cannot be incorrect. It is a fact. There are roughly 310 million people in the United States of America at this moment. You can believe there are 310 million, but that belief is not a fact. If you apply belief to a factual statement, then you're intentionally muddling reality to justify something external.

To put it more simply: the belief and the fact are separate entities, the latter of which is based on tangible knowledge, the former of which is ideologically set up to exist even when knowledge is unavailable. So when you say "I believe something to be a fact," you are actually saying something that contradicts itself. It either is a fact, or it's a belief. They cannot be the same thing.

yes, facts are. Did you even understand what i said?

Shaun, i don't think you're getting the point.

You can drop the attitude. We can have a debate and even disagree, or you can be rude about it and I can shut the debate down. That little bit there: insulting. If you're going to point out a correction, you can do it without belittling your intellectual "opponent."

Christian: God exists.

Atheist: God doesn't exist.

Both of these are objective statements. both of these people believe these contradictory objective statements to be true!

Neither of those are objective statements. Both are articles of faith in the form you have provided. But since atheists do not say "God doesn't exist" alone, you're intentionally oversimplifying a group's ideological stance. Atheists do not say "God doesn't exist." They say "there is no observable scientific evidence for the existence of God; therefore, he does not exist." But even that statement is flirting with subjectivity. Regardless, both statements are, as you've stated them, subjective. Both rely on belief to function, which is entirely subjective as an ideological principle.

i'm not saying that belief affects facts- i never even implied that. I'm just saying that some people believe things that they believe to be facts, while other people believe contradictory things that they believe to be facts.

The problem is the language, Bilbo. They don't actually believe a fact. They believe an ideological principle, which does not require the fact to exist. That's the difference here. When you say "I believe the moon exists," that is something drastically different from saying "the moon exists."

that is, honestly, ridiculous and insulting.

You can see that i put in bold your first statement- and a statement, i must say, that is blatantly ignorant, ridiculous, and without any proof to back it up.

A) Don't blame me for history.

B) There were over 12 religious Crusades by various Christian groups in the 11th, 12th, and 13th centuries. Religion was responsible for pushing racist ideologies, which led to the various versions of Christian-based slavery, followed by discrimination, intermingled with books on why Africans are inferior or subspecies, etc. etc. etc. Numerous Christian groups in the U.S. alone practice discrimination against women, people of color, and/or homosexuals. There are racists, sexists, and homophobes in almost every major Christian sect. Look up the number of wars fought in the name of the Christian faith. Look at the Inquisition, Salem Witch Trials (among other trials), the numerous beatings, rapes, murders, terrorist attacks, and so on, all performed in the name of religion by people of various Christian groups. If you find this insulting, it's not because I point it out; it's because they happen and are performed by people who may very well affiliate themselves with your particular sect of Christianity.

You're telling me that, if people who called themselves "christian", once upon a time, started wars, then i must be ashamed of my religion and give it up, because i must be classifed with them?

I never said you had to be ashamed, just that you can't weasel your way out of dealing with the fact that such things happened and were performed by people at some point in almost every Christian sect we know to exist. If you want to play innocent, then you really have to separate yourself from Churches which do very little to stop such people from doing what they do.

Christianity is about jesus- if jesus practiced awful things, then you could say "the only thing to do now is to leave christianity". However, stating that the actions of other so-called "christians" should affect my belief is insulting.

Never said it should affect your belief. You're straw-manning again. You do this a lot. You imagine arguments that aren't being made, and then attack them, which forces me to defend myself against them.

Oh, look. Thousands of atheists who have been involved in discrimination and war! Shaun, leave atheism immediately!

Yup. And? I'm not part of a church or any group or sect. I'm just an atheist. There are also little to no instances in which evil has been done in the NAME of atheism. There have been many acts performed by people who are atheists, but that is far different from someone waging physical or cultural war against someone else in the interest of "cleansing them" (broadly defined here) for a religious purpose (i.e., because it is God's will). There are no instances I know of in which someone said "I attack you in the name of Atheism." If you can provide any examples, I would love to see them.

so, shaun- the best way to deal with things is this way?

C(hristian) #1: I'm going to slaughter a man because i just mis-interpreted the bible.

C #2: Oh! You're giving christianity a bad name- i think i'll leave it, even though it's what i believe in, because i'm afraid of the idiots out there who enjoy generalizing me with him. Bye!

That's one way to do it. Or you could outwardly express condemnation towards those that do evil in the name of your God. The problem is that you're not doing that: you're saying "I am not them, so let's not talk about it." And that's great for you, but not for anyone else who is actually concerned about the awful things done to other humans in the name of religion (not just Christian religion, if we're being honest).

This is really a well-worn argument, though. We're dancing around things that have been said before and that really should have been settled.

[Jack]

Actually, Jack, you're wrong, because you're not looking at it from the right perspective, nor are you looking at your original post :P .

You said that " Atheism should be the default ". Now, I agree that it is the default, but not that it should be. You see the difference?

Actually, try observing the conversation me and Clar were having. I was saying it should be the default in reference to what the man Clarissa was talking about believed. He believed that Christianity was the default, I was saying he should believe Atheism is the default. See the difference?

Also, in relation to what you and Shaun are discussing; in science and philosophy you are never called upon to disprove a negative. You can't say "God exists because you cannot prove he doesn't". As is the nature of scientific discovery and investigation, God doesn't exist until proven otherwise. Anyone that thinks otherwise is acting on faith and faith alone.

[Bilbo]

You've just proven my point for me. Belief can apply to anything, regardless of any factuality that might exist in any particular moment. The fact that something you believe in is a fact is separate from the act of believing in that thing. A fact is not incorrect. It cannot be incorrect. It is a fact. There are roughly 310 million people in the United States of America at this moment. You can believe there are 310 million, but that belief is not a fact. If you apply belief to a factual statement, then you're intentionally muddling reality to justify something external.

K, I think that we're misunderstanding eachother.

Let's get it straight.

1.) I never said that belief affects a fact! I never even said that believing in something that is objective makes it a fact- all I said was that two different people believe two contradictory things to be facts.

And it's that simple.

I'm not sure what you're point exactly is- is it that belief doesn't change the facts? Because I never said it did.

To put it more simply: the belief and the fact are separate entities, the latter of which is based on tangible knowledge, the former of which is ideologically set up to exist even when knowledge is unavailable. So when you say "I believe something to be a fact," you are actually saying something that contradicts itself. It either is a fact, or it's a belief. They cannot be the same thing.

I would disagree.

When someone says "I believe this to be a fact", they're saying that " This is a non-subjective thing which either is this or it is that.".

And actually, Shaun, people tend to believe things because there is evidence for them. We also gather facts from evidence.

" I believe that I am a male " . Contrary to what you have said, this is more than a " idea that is set up for me because knowledge is unavailable", it is sprining from evidence.

" I am a male" is not contradictory to the statement "I believe myself to be a male,", or, " I believe myself not to be a male".

Just because they're different doesn't mean that they have to be contradictions. I think that this whole debate has turned into something silly because of a misinterpretation.



You can drop the attitude. We can have a debate and even disagree, or you can be rude about it and I can shut the debate down. That little bit there: insulting. If you're going to point out a correction, you can do it without belittling your intellectual "opponent."

yes, facts are. Did you even understand what i said?

Maybe you believed the "Did you even understand what I said" to be reeking of attitude, or rebellion, but that's not the way I typed it.

It was an honest question.

Shaun, i don't think you're getting the point.

And that- that was also an honest statement, and I don't understand how it's full of "attitude". Interpreting statements over online debate is hard, since you can't hear the other person's tone.

Neither of those are objective statements.

Um, yes they are.

Either God exists, or he doesn't. He can't be real for me and not real for you- that would be an obvious contradiction.

Both are articles of faith in the form you have provided.

Yes, they are articles of faith- however, either God is real or he isn't.

But since atheists do not say "God doesn't exist" alone, you're intentionally oversimplifying a group's ideological stance. Atheists do not say "God doesn't exist." They say "there is no observable scientific evidence for the existence of God; therefore, he does not exist."

Atheists may say " There is no observable scientific evidence for the existence of God, therefore, he does not exist", while a Christian will say, " There is much observable scientific proof for the existence of God, therefore, He is."

How in the world are they not objective? Look, no attitude here, no anything like that- do you know what objective means?

undistorted by emotion or personal bias; based on observable phenomena; "an objective appraisal".

I know that you'll debate this, but Christians see much evidence for God, even in the world around us. When we say " God exists", it is not like saying " Blue is a nice color". To say "Blue is a nice color" is subjective for everyone- some will say that it's not a nice color, because it's all based on personal prejudice.

However, "God exists" is either true, or it isn't. Herein lies one of the most obvious differences between subjectivity and objectivity.

Do you agree?



But even that statement is flirting with subjectivity. Regardless, both statements are, as you've stated them, subjective. Both rely on belief to function, which is entirely subjective as an ideological principle.

No, either "God exists", or "God does not exist". You don't have to include belief in there- either God is a real thing, or he isn't! It's that simple.

The concept and reality of God/no God, doesn't rely on belief in him. It is simply a yes-or-no- kind of thing.

The problem is the language, Bilbo. They don't actually believe a fact. They believe an ideological principle, which does not require the fact to exist.

It all depends.

Let's say that it actually is a fact that God exists. Now, I believe that God exists. Am I believing merely an ideological principle, or am I believing that a real God truly exists?

I agree that an ideological principle does not require a fact to exist. However, that truth does not make the statement " God exists" subjective.

Subjective: taking place within the mind and modified by individual bias.

You see, whether God exists or not- it is not affected at all by individual bias. Either he does, or he doesn't.

Let's say that we have a plant, Shaun. This plant is approximately 10 inches tall. Now, if you walked up, and said "This plant is 12 inches tall", I would disagree with you, but it would still be an objective statement.



That's the difference here. When you say "I believe the moon exists," that is something drastically different from saying "the moon exists."

It is indeed. :P

A) Don't blame me for history.

Hold on, hold on. I'm not blaming you for history- I'm blaming your for your insulting and slightly discouraging view that because others in my religion have done wrong, I should take responsibility for that wrong-doing.

B) There were over 12 religious Crusades by various Christian groups in the 11th, 12th, and 13th centuries. Religion was responsible for pushing racist ideologies, which led to the various versions of Christian-based slavery, followed by discrimination, intermingled with books on why Africans are inferior or subspecies, etc. etc. etc. Numerous Christian groups in the U.S. alone practice discrimination against women, people of color, and/or homosexuals. There are racists, sexists, and homophobes in almost every major Christian sect. Look up the number of wars fought in the name of the Christian faith. Look at the Inquisition, Salem Witch Trials (among other trials), the numerous beatings, rapes, murders, terrorist attacks, and so on, all performed in the name of religion by people of various Christian groups. If you find this insulting, it's not because I point it out; it's because they happen and are performed by people who may very well affiliate themselves with your particular sect of Christianity.

First off, most importantly: You still seem to believe that I would be insulted because of things other people who professed to be Christians did.

In fact, I don't even believe that the Crusaders were Christian. As I have said before, Jesus promoted love and peace- a statement which you ignored, because it showed you something about the Christian faith- that it really doesn't promote murders.

Secondly: I find it funny that you would include "racism" in there, when Darwin believed that black people were less developed, thus encouraging colored slaves.

Three: It would be a bit difficult to have a Crusader in the same religious sect as me, as my particular denomination was started in about 1630, eh?

I never said you had to be ashamed, just that you can't weasel your way out of dealing with the fact that such things happened and were performed by people at some point in almost every Christian sect we know to exist.

Weasel out? Whoever said I was trying to "weasel out" of anything?

Also, that only holds with my belief that "many will say "Lord Lord" and still not be saved.

I will not be grouped with them because they were not true Christians.

If you want to play innocent, then you really have to separate yourself from Churches which do very little to stop such people from doing what they do.

If I want to play innocent? But I'm not innocent! No-one is, including you.

Also; firstly: I am in the church of God- no, this isn't some sort of weird new denomination. I am grouped with true Christians from around the world, because we all share the same inheritance- anything we have ever done before, it's all washed away.

So, no- you don't separate yourself from a church just because fifteen-hundred years ago they did this-and-this.

Never said it should affect your belief. You're straw-manning again. You do this a lot. You imagine arguments that aren't being made, and then attack them, which forces me to defend myself against them.

Actually, you did say that it should affect my belief. Basically, you suggested to me that I should leave Christianity.


Yup. And? I'm not part of a church or any group or sect. I'm just an atheist. There are also little to no instances in which evil has been done in the NAME of atheism. There have been many acts performed by people who are atheists, but that is far different from someone waging physical or cultural war against someone else in the interest of "cleansing them" (broadly defined here) for a religious purpose (i.e., because it is God's will). There are no instances I know of in which someone said "I attack you in the name of Atheism." If you can provide any examples, I would love to see them.

Yes, religious people make mistakes- religious people are unsaved as well.

Yes, a vast number of wars are started because of idiot groups of religious people- so what? As before, my main point is this: you can't group me with them.

I was saying that, what I said, mainly because it seemed like it was what you were saying to me.


That's one way to do it. Or you could outwardly express condemnation towards those that do evil in the name of your God. The problem is that you're not doing that: you're saying "I am not them, so let's not talk about it."

Oh? Did I ever say that? No, I didn't. You're putting words into my mouth.

What I did say, more like: I am not with them. You cannot generalize me with them. They are non-Christians.

In fact, I have already said that within this debate.

Now that I've "expressed condemnation" towards them, I suppose you want me to take action? And, if I don't, will that make me just like those other so-called-Christians who massacred others?

And that's great for you, but not for anyone else who is actually concerned about the awful things done to other humans in the name of religion (not just Christian religion, if we're being honest).



This is really a well-worn argument, though. We're dancing around things that have been said before and that really should have been settled.

True. It seems to me like this whole debate has been started via a misunderstanding- i it seems like it's not really helping. I just have to make sure that I don't introduce any new topics :P


dfdf

[KnightinArmor02]

My cousin is an excelent exmple of this, he goes to church unfailing every sunday, and then he omes home and curses like a sailor, usies the lord's name in vain, lies to hi friends, steals from stores and still has the gall to call himself christian. and i guess that it isn't necissarily unchristian to do those things, but the fact that he does it at all makes me question his faith.

[JoRockwell]

I'm just going to interject my opinion on this, and maybe jump into the fray.

Personally, I am a Roman Catholic. No, I do not believe I am better than anyone else because quiet honestly I think every religion has something to bring to the table. In a way, I believe that every religion has something right, whether it's meditation or reincarnation or karma or whatever.

No, in modern society, I believe that there are two different kinds of Christians. There are those who are truly a part of the Christian faith, be they Catholic or Protestant. They truly believe what they're told and they do their best to walk by Christ each day and help others just as He instructed us. However, there are also those who call themselves Christians that maybe go to mass once or twice a year, or whenever they hear the sermon or the gospel, they ignore it by the time they get out of church. These are the sort who think they're good Christians, when in reality they don't display the qualities of a loving human being at all, which is what a Christian is meant to be.

Sadly, I think the latter are much more common than the former, but I don't believe that fake Christianity is a universal thing. I'd like to think that I'm the former, but there's no way of knowing with me. I make far too many mistakes and I sin just as much as anyone, so I don't know how much of a true Christian that makes me. I just sincerely hope it gets better.

[éan]

These debates happen on every forum and are generally never, ever solved because people tend to stick to their opinions.

...isn't this like the 109380329850923845 one to spring up on YWO?

[Shylee Long]

No one should judge anyone else, everyone will have to atone for their lives once they die. No one is prefect everyone makes mistakes but it's what you choose to do after that that defines what kind of person you are.

[Nevermore]

Christianity? A TREND?

My good fellow, have you been even WATCHING the progression of history? The opposite seems far more true in this case.

[KnightinArmor02]

Christianity? A TREND?

My good fellow, have you been even WATCHING the progression of history? The opposite seems far more true in this case.

The question isnt if Christianity was a trend in the past, it was if it had become a trend in modern society. which i still say, depends on a person's background.
Take me for example, my family is predominantly Christian. I on the other hand am what i like to call "Open". I dont say that God simply cant exist because i dont know that, all i ask is that before you ask me to believe in something, show me proof that the thing is real and not just a character from a story told centuries ago. i just dont believe that an all powerful being simply "Willed" himself into being and then snapped his fingers and there was the universe. its illogical.

[Dabs]

Maybe an interpretation of Christianity can become popular depending on the social climate of an area, but I don't think it can become trendy. Religion is a deeply emotional issue. You can't sell feelings and emotions. And if someone is parading themselves as a Christian when they're really not... well, I don't think that makes sense either. What purpose would that serve? Chances are a jew wouldn't be living in a community of people who don't accept jews, and the same goes for anyone of any belief.

[OrionRising]

I think it thought it may be found interesting that during my civics class we were learning about some stupid stuff and the teacher asked "How many of you are Christians?" and just about everyone raised there hand. Then, rephrasing his question he asked, "How many of you are practicing Christians?" and nobody raised there hand. It seems to me that in recent years religion has become secondary and although many people call themselves Christians few actually still practice the religion. Most students in the class openly admitted that they only went to church once or twice a year. Which leads me to the conclusion that Christianity is nothing more then a trend from one generation to another. It seems that normally if a person's parents are Christian then they to are Christian, even if they do not fully believe or practice the religion.

[Dabs]

I think it thought it may be found interesting that during my civics class we were learning about some stupid stuff and the teacher asked "How many of you are Christians?" and just about everyone raised there hand. Then, rephrasing his question he asked, "How many of you are practicing Christians?" and nobody raised there hand. It seems to me that in recent years religion has become secondary and although many people call themselves Christians few actually still practice the religion. Most students in the class openly admitted that they only went to church once or twice a year. Which leads me to the conclusion that Christianity is nothing more then a trend from one generation to another. It seems that normally if a person's parents are Christian then they to are Christian, even if they do not fully believe or practice the religion.

I don't think that their lack of practice makes it a trend. I don't think that's what a trend is, because a trend, I believe, requires some kind of immersion, though shallow it may be. I think that people have faith in God and Christ, but they just go about it in a very passive way. That doesn't make it a trend, that just means that they're not super passionate about it, and they don't have to be if they don't want to.

[OrionRising]

What I'm trying to say is that these days many people's religion is passed down to them by their parents who and although they MIGHT not actually believe in their religion they still consider themselves part of that religion because their parents were a part of it. I am not attempting to imply that this is true in all cases but I think that in many cases religion is nothing more than something passed down by the parents, and thus a trend.

[Dabs]

Okay, I thought you were using the word trend in a more colloquial sense, though I'm not sure if you're using it 100% correctly anyway. Religions are always going through trends; you're just making note of a specific one.

[Nevermore]

OrionRising,

The common dictionary definition of the word 'trend' is as follows: the general course or prevailing tendency, i.e a fashion trend, or the 'trend' of events. So I'm not sure it's really relevant for this issue, seeing as Christianity is hardly a prevailing tendency in today's youth; quite the opposite really.

If you intend to argue that Christianity is becoming a concept that is simply passed down from parent to progeny without any real emotional connection to the belief system, than I'd say that in my opinion yes, Christianity is becoming more of something that teen's say they are because of their background, rather than a set of values and beliefs that they hold to. Sadly, human faith is suffering.

But returning to the original statement that spawned this debate...wherein it was stated that Christianity has become something that teenagers simply do because it's the 'cool' thing to do...

Eh?

I mean really. That statement baffles me. How often do you see the average teen in the halls flashing their Christ-bling and quoting verses down the halls at each other? Maybe somewhere, I don't freaking know, but from what I've seen, Christianity is most certainly NOT seen as cool OR mainstream in teenage subculture, and is thus not a trend. Look at the media portrayal of religious tropes, as well as the general attitudes displayed towards religion-be they constructive or no-and I think you'll find that people are finding more and more way's to pigeon-hole religion as something foolish.

If anything, it's become more mainstream and 'hip' so to speak to adopt an atheistic, pseudo-intellectual mindset quoting 'logic' and The God Delusion like the Christian Bible. No mistake, I know that there are many truly rational, thoughtful atheists out there, and I mean no disrespect in any way whatsoever; after all, Charles Darwin revolutionized modern science. But nonetheless, if there's any trend developing among teenagers, I feel it's of a more atheist bent than theist.

[FayGee]

Aw, c'mon, Nemo. Having been on here for almost a year, you should know the rule about bumping threads! :P

[Nevermore]

Never was too good with rules and such... :P

But no worries Fay, I'll be good :)

[FayGee]

Never was too good with rules and such... :P

heh. lol. Same here. ^^ That's why once I reformed I get a kick out of correcting other people. :D That doesn't put me in the most favorable light, eh? :whistle:

But no worries Fay, I'll be good :)

I should hope so... :P

[lostbookworm]

BUMP ALL THE THREADS!

PS. Debate threads are a bit different to other threads, so if you bring something new to the table, it's fine.

[FayGee]

BUMP ALL THE THREADS!

PS. Debate threads are a bit different to other threads, so if you bring something new to the table, it's fine.

I guess... But the thing is that if it has seven pages (like this one) then everything will have been said and there isn't any point in reviving it.

[Nevermore]

Awww...are you saying my points aren't original Fay? I'm wounded, really! :D

Still, I see your point.

[lostbookworm]

I guess... But the thing is that if it has seven pages (like this one) then everything will have been said and there isn't any point in reviving it.

Stupidest thing anyone has ever said. "Everything that can be invented has already been invented."

Now all we need is a right-wing conservative Evangelical to come on here and proclaim us all being Satanist's because we actually discuss thing's like this.

[Nevermore]

So we CAN continue the topic than....sweet :D

I guess I'll sum up my original point by saying that no, I most certainly do not believe that Christianity has become a 'trend', or at least, has not become the definition of trend being used for this particular argument (Namely, something that people simply do because it is 'cool'.). In fact, I find that argument somewhat ridiculous, seeing as the opposite (a definite rise in the atheist/pseudo-intellectual on the internet) seems more realistic.

[Julian]

I guess... But the thing is that if it has seven pages (like this one) then everything will have been said and there isn't any point in reviving it.

THis is stupid. How can everything be said This point is like a caveman saying how everything has been discovered after they discovered fire.

As for the debate; really? This is again a subject of, 'Oh, let's take one single notion and debate about a characteristic that it and many others have, but let's act as if it only exists in this particular notion!'

No, Christianity is not a trend as a cat isn't a poodle. Though, some cats may think otherwise. But it's in their heads.

[Bowie20049]

It's really more of a trend to hate on religion without any rational reason :P

[Peppermental]

Seriously, what kind of useless fuck thinks it's acceptable to bump this thread constantly? The premise of this debate is ridiculous, it didn't merit more than a page worth of comments, and we've managed to slowly bump it with trendy pseudo-philosophical banter and incompetent speeches about God. I have no faith left in people after reading this thread.

[themelster]

No one should join any religion just for the "popularity" of it. I am a Baptist Christian and proud of it.

[Dabs]

Seriously, what kind of useless fuck thinks it's acceptable to bump this thread constantly? The premise of this debate is ridiculous, it didn't merit more than a page worth of comments, and we've managed to slowly bump it with trendy pseudo-philosophical banter and incompetent speeches about God. I have no faith left in people after reading this thread.

This.