World religions versus Christianity

[Occams Barber]

Don't worry, Christian influence will dwindle. But, no need to ask me how I know...

I don't need to ask. Obviously - you're a Christian therefore you just "know". No reason required.
OB

 

[zippy2006]

Actually atheism and secularism are two different beasts.

Modern atheism is but one of the many children of secularism. Atheists are just thoroughgoing secularists. It's not at all difficult for someone who has been raised in a secular society to understand atheism. Indeed it is perfectly natural.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I don't need to ask. Obviously - you're a Christian therefore you just "know". No reason required.
OB

No, that's not what I was alluding to. It's not because I just somehow "know."

Maybe consider my previous post as a bit of 'insider' humor ...

 

[Occams Barber]

Actually secularism is much more pervasive than Christianity in the Western countries, so your arguments here are pretty much backwards. Christians understand seculars (and atheists) better than seculars understand Christians precisely for all the reasons you've stated. Indeed, the reason there are so many former believers is because the air of secularism suffocated their faith, a faith that was never properly perceived due to the secular lens. Maybe there are a handful of fundamentalists who have been cocooned from the world, to whom your point holds, but apart from that group it is the opposite.

Firstly I agree with @JackRT - atheism and secularism are not necessarily the same thing.

Secondly I agree with you to some extent. There was a time when the views of the state and the church more or less coincided. Now the division between secular views of the world and the more entrenched Christian views is widening. This means Christianity is now constantly coming up against the views of a secular majority. Christian views are becoming less listened to and less relevant. The Christian reaction seems to be one of bewilderment and cries of "foul!".

After centuries of unquestioned domination of the moral landscape, Christianity is finally being prodded with the most dangerous question which can be asked - "Why?"

The only answer I'm hearing is "Because".
OB

 

[FireDragon76]

Actually secularism is much more pervasive than Christianity in the Western countries, so your arguments here are pretty much backwards. Christians understand seculars (and atheists) better than seculars understand Christians precisely for all the reasons you've stated.

Both are faulty assumptions.

Christians as represented on these forums most certainly do not understand secularism, or the forces behind it.

Indeed, the reason there are so many former believers is because the air of secularism suffocated their faith, a faith that was never properly perceived due to the secular lens.

This is just a sour grapes argument, and untrue. Secularism is not a thing in a substantial sense that it could do such a thing in the first place. Secularism is the realization that we can get along just fine without your religion being the controlling narrative in society.

 

[Occams Barber]

No, that's not what I was alluding to. It's not because I just somehow "know."

Maybe just consider my previous post to be a bit of 'insider' humor ...

OK. Thanks Phil. I'll tentatively allocate this post to my wheat/tares or sheep/goat file with a link to "no true Christian" and "narrow/wide gate". Hopefully that should cover it if I need to refer back at a later date.
OB

EDIT (Note to self) 'End times' - mustn't forget 'End times'.

 

[JackRT]

Firstly I agree with @JackRT - atheism and secularism are not necessarily the same thing.

Secondly I agree with you to some extent. There was a time when the views of the state and the church more or less coincided. Now the division between secular views of the world and the more entrenched Christian views is widening. This means Christianity is now constantly coming up against the views of a secular majority. Christian views are becoming less listened to and less relevant. The Christian reaction seems to be one of bewilderment and cries of "foul!".

After centuries of unquestioned domination of the moral landscape, Christianity is finally being prodded with the most dangerous question which can be asked - "Why?"

The only answer I'm hearing is "Because".
OB

A fairly large block of my fellow Christians have what could be called an entitlement mentality. For a great many centuries we Christians have had things our own way and have controlled society to such an extent that we have been able to impose our own agenda without challenge. However, when minority groups started demanding and receiving rights that they had previously been denied, rights that Christians held all along, these same Christians felt threatened and some even claimed that they were being persecuted. Rights and freedoms are not part of a zero-sum game. Expanding them does not thereby reduce them for some other group. For example, extending marriage rights to homosexuals has not reduced the rights of heterosexuals in the slightest way. In reality Christians have lost no rights and are not threatened in any meaningful way.

 

[FireDragon76]

A fairly large block of my fellow Christians have what could be called an entitlement mentality. For a great many centuries we Christians have had things our own way and have controlled society to such an extent that we have been able to impose our own agenda without challenge. However, when minority groups started demanding and receiving rights that they had previously been denied, rights that Christians held all along, these same Christians felt threatened and some even claimed that they were being persecuted. Rights and freedoms are not part of a zero-sum game. Expanding them does not thereby reduce them for some other group. For example, extending marriage rights to homosexuals has not reduced the rights of heterosexuals in the slightest way. In reality Christians have lost no rights and are not threatened in any meaningful way.

People who think Christians must be against secularism need to read some of the later work of Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Bonhoeffer was simply amplifying Luther's own thought. Is Luther "un-Christian" for recognizing a world that gets along without the Gospel as a controlling narrative?

 

[Rachel20]

it's likely that atheists understand Christianity far better than Christians understand atheists. Many atheists are ex-Christians who've seen the issue from both sides.

Atheists can certainly understand faith in the sense of doctrine, but not in the sense of belief. I have my doubts about ex-Christians based on things I've heard from some of them.

The second is there's no underlying doctrine or dogma or worldview associated with atheism - there isn't much to be exposed to. If I tried to write a book on atheistic 'belief' I'd run out of material after the first couple of sentences.

hmm I think secularism is a world view. If yours has nothing to do with atheism, what is your worldview?

If I go back a few decades my impression of Christianity was neutral - it was wrong-headed but relatively harmless. I now regard Christian certainty about its 'rightness' as a potentially dangerous way of seeing the world.

I remember the amicable atheism. That's definitely all changed. Viewing Christianity as dangerous is a new strategy and is dangerous itself imo

With luck, Christian influence will dwindle as numbers continue to fall.

Scripture predicts this (2 Thess 2, 2 Ti 4:3, etc...), but I don't think it will be the imagined utopia

 

[FireDragon76]

Atheists can certainly understand faith in the sense of doctrine, but not in the sense of belief. I have my doubts about ex-Christians based on things I've heard from some of them.

There are many atheists and non-Christians who are former Christians and understand what it is like to believe from a phenomenological standpoint. In addition, there are people who may not be believers per se, but they understand the dynamics of religion in terms of sociology or psychology.

hmm I think secularism is a world view. If yours has nothing to do with atheism, what is your worldview?

Secularism is not, in fact, a worldview at all. It's nothing more than not privileging any particular religious viewpoint in public life.

I remember the amicable atheism. That's definitely all changed. Viewing Christianity as dangerous is a new strategy and is dangerous itself imo

It's not a new strategy, it goes back to the Enlightenment. People like Thomas Payne viewed Christianity as pernicious. If something is untrue, the potential dangers in it are obvious.

 

[Occams Barber]

Atheists can certainly understand faith in the sense of doctrine, but not in the sense of belief. I have my doubts about ex-Christians based on things I've heard from some of them.

You're welcome to argue that some ex Christians don't comprehend Christian belief. I have no idea. My point was that generally speaking atheists probably understand Christianity better than Christians understand atheists.

hmm I think secularism is a world view. If yours has nothing to do with atheism, what is your worldview?

This is what I mean about not understanding. Atheism is not a worldview. It is simply the absence of a belief in gods or the supernatural in general. Different atheists will have different worldviews. There are atheists on this Forum I would vehemently disagree with because I have a totally different worldview.

For what its worth I answered a similar question a few months back:

I'll accept atheist as a basic description. Beyond that I'm reluctant to adopt labels since they often carry baggage which doesn't necessarily apply. I might be a nihilistic nihilist since I suspect that nihilism is normality and would not exist as a concept if people realised that life doesn't need a reason anymore than cauliflowers need a reason. It's a bit like the idea that there would be no atheists if everyone stopped believing in a God. You can't not-believe in something which doesn't exist.

Apart from that, I'm probably a materialist since I only accept that there's 'real' stuff. I think free will is illusory and I have a conviction that most people are OK if you give them half a chance. I'm also pretty sure that there are no little green men flitting around in flying saucers and the world isn't flat.

Putting all of this together - I'm a sort of atheistic, nihilistic nihilist, deterministic materialist with a generous dash of optimistic scepticism.​

I remember the amicable atheism. That's definitely all changed. Viewing Christianity as dangerous is a new strategy and is dangerous itself imo

Is it dangerous to object to discrimination?
Is it dangerous to be wary of those who claim absolute rightness 'on faith'?
Is it dangerous to resist attempts to substitute religion for science?
Is it dangerous to object to a religion which describes those who don't fit its moral framework as 'abominations'?

OB

 

[2PhiloVoid]

OK. Thanks Phil. I'll tentatively allocate this post to my wheat/tares or sheep/goat file with a link to "no true Christian" and "narrow/wide gate". Hopefully that should cover it if I need to refer back at a later date.
OB

EDIT (Note to self) 'End times' - mustn't forget 'End times'.

Ok. ... sounds fine by me.

 

[FireDragon76]

The biggest mistake that Christians make is assuming atheists are the enemy or an adversary, when they should really be looking in the mirror for the reasons for the decline of their religion in developed nations. Many of us just simply got tired of the spiritual abuse and arbitrary traditionalism/conservativism masquerading as piety.

After all, one could believe the Bible is not literally true and still be a Christian out of pragmatism (an argument made by the American philosopher William James). But if religion ceases to be a force for good in society, well, it's like salt losing its saltiness.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

You're welcome to argue that some ex Christians don't comprehend Christian belief. I have no idea. My point was that generally speaking atheists probably understand Christianity better than Christians understand atheists.

I think it's fine if you make this assertion and in many cases it's likely true. However, just keep in mind that some Christians were atheists or agnostics before they took Christianity to heart.

​

 

[zippy2006]

This is just a sour grapes argument, and untrue. Secularism is not a thing in a substantial sense that it could do such a thing in the first place. Secularism is the realization that we can get along just fine without your religion being the controlling narrative in society.

"Secularism can't suffocate faith because it is not a substantial thing. Secularism is the realization that the religious narrative is unnecessary."

I rest my case.

 

[FireDragon76]

"Secularism can't suffocate faith because it is not a substantial thing. Secularism is the realization that the religious narrative is unnecessary."

I rest my case.

That's not an attack on faith. It's an attack on privileging any particular religious ideology.

 

[Occams Barber]

"Secularism can't suffocate faith because it is not a substantial thing. Secularism is the realization that the religious narrative is unnecessary."

I rest my case.

Go back and read @JackRT 's Post #107.

Christianity is free to have its own religious narrative. However when it comes to getting its views adopted in wider society it must now line up and compete, on an equal footing, with other views.

This means that the justification for a particular position needs to be expressed in terms which can be accepted by others. It is no longer enough to say the Bible/Christian tradition etc. says so and expect automatic acquiescence. To compete on an equal footing Christianity needs to make its case using facts and reasoning like any other interest group.

Getting this point across to some Christians is a little like teaching a spoiled child to share.

OB

 

[FireDragon76]

Go back and read @JackRT 's Post #107.

Christianity is free to have its own religious narrative. However when it comes to getting its views adopted in wider society it must now line up and compete, on an equal footing, with other views.

This means that the justification for a particular position needs to be expressed in terms which can be accepted by others. It is no longer enough to say the Bible/Christian tradition etc. says so and expect automatic acquiescence. To compete on an equal footing Christianity needs to make its case by reasoning like any other interest group.

Getting this point across to some Christians is a little like teaching a spoiled child to share.

OB

Indeed. It might be hard for some Christians to understand, but for most of the history of Christendom, people were not free to express doubt about the truths of the Christian religion. You weren't even free to choose a different church to go to, for that matter.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Secularism derives from the realisation that freedom of religion requires the state to be neutral.
Putting the majority religion in charge sabotages the very idea of religious freedom.

Atheists (and pretty much everyone else) cannot help but view evangelical Christianity as dangerous in light of its cult-like support of Trump - a man so fundamentally anti-Christian in every conceivable way that it beggars the mind.

 

[zippy2006]

Secularism derives from the realisation that freedom of religion requires the state to be neutral.
Putting the majority religion in charge sabotages the very idea of religious freedom.

A separation principle does help secularism grow, but secularism is certainly not limited to a separation principle:

Secularism: indifference to or rejection or exclusion of religion and religious considerations (Merriam-Webster)

Secularism: the belief that religion should not be involved in the organization of society, education, etc. (Oxford Learner's Dictionary)
​

The question at hand is quite simple: is religion or atheism more acceptable to the secular mind? Once we grant the secular nature of the West OB's claims disintegrate.