Is it just Todd, or is there an increasing wariness surrounding God/Christianity?

[BustyTheClown]

Todd mentioned something in his thread about whether it's ok to complain about the way the world is when we pretty much asked for it. He said that if people were to forward his message, they would be less inclined to send it to a lot of people because they would question the beliefs of its recipients -- namely, their belief/disbelief in God and his influence on our lives.

Either there is an increasing uneasiness surrounding Christianity on the whole, or there are just more people out there willing to admit that they aren't Christian, or at least that they aren't traditionally Christian. In case there is any ambiguity about this statement, let me try to clarify: I think a society shying away from Christianity is very different from individual members in that society denouncing the religion.

Personally, it seems to me as though more people are willing to denounce more traditional forms of Christianity, rather than people on the whole just shrinking away from it.

First of all, what do you all think about Todd's observation?

Secondly, do you think that non-traditional Christianity is still Christianity? Has it been too watered down through all the divisions and sects and different doctrines?

This is something that fascinates me, so please let me know what you think. Let's try to remain civil here, please. Personal beliefs are important, but it is equally important to respect those you disagree with.

 

[phrodeau]

First, I don't believe it's original. I think he copied it from an e-mail chain letter.

Second, I'm hard-pressed to define "traditional" Christianity, since every sect claims to be based on the true teachings of Christ, and none that I've encountered has managed to pass muster.

I think the perceived uneasiness concerning Christianity stems from America's gradual realization that it is not strictly a Christian country, and that awareness and tolerance is called for towards the non-Christian population. For example, after the WTC disaster American Muslims suddenly became visible, and needed to be recognized as victims as well.

 

[BustyTheClown]

First, I don't believe it's original. I think he copied it from an e-mail chain letter.

Second, I'm hard-pressed to define "traditional" Christianity, since every sect claims to be based on the true teachings of Christ, and none that I've encountered has managed to pass muster.

I think the perceived uneasiness concerning Christianity stems from America's gradual realization that it is not strictly a Christian country, and that awareness and tolerance is called for towards the non-Christian population. For example, after the WTC disaster American Muslims suddenly became visible, and needed to be recognized as victims as well.

My sentiments exactly. I think there has been movement away from Christianity since long before the 9/11 thing, though. I think more people are more comfortable admitting to not being Christian. The Church does not wield as much power as it used to, and that means it has less influence, people are less intimidated by it and its followers. Maybe Todd's post is indirectly trying to blame non-Christians for the decline in society's morals, but I won't put those words in his mouth. If he's saying something like that, I'll leave it to him to put out there.

 

[Oliver Clozoff]

Since long before the 9/11 thing? LOL. How about since the Enlightenment? There's nothing new about the declining status of not only Christianity, but most world religions. Here of course, Christianity is the most prevalent, but in general we live in a secular culture now. There's something of a "civic religion" that has emerged to replace some of our lost piety, though, and I think we've seen a lot of that since 9/11 what with the flag-waving and beatification of rescue personnel. But "religion proper" is something that one now has to apologize for, especially in a forum like this one.

At worst, our larger culture holds that religious belief is generally one of two things - either the act of a automaton being manipulated by political elites (Marx's argument that religion is the opiate of the masses) or else that it's the granddaddy of all psychological neuroses (Freud's idea that belief in God occurred in those who failed to adjust properly to the notion that their own parents couldn't adequately protect them from the dangers of the world). At best, intellectuals tend to see religion as William James saw it, as a relatively harmless and often helpful fiction that people engage in.

Still, though, there are many, including myself, who regard our faiths as a deeply personal and vital part of our lives and although I share a strong a strong pragmatist view of religion with James, for me it goes beyond that.

Anyway, you're right. For good or bad, the church isn't nearly as powerful as it used to be.

 

[freescorfr]

Secondly, do you think that non-traditional Christianity is still Christianity? Has it been too watered down through all the divisions and sects and different doctrines?


I think many Christian theologians today see The Church as an aspect of human development and, therefore, constantly in the process of change. This is in stark contrast to the Tridentine view of the Church as the depository of truth or Vatican I and papal infallability. Many christians are also willing today to accept a relativist stance see e.g. "The menu is not the meal" thread in which Dillinger outlines some ideas from Neurosemantics, to which many Christians subscribe.