Christianity relevant in a secular society?

[JonMiller]

So the US is joining Europe in becoming more secular. There was some report recently that the % of Christians have dropped from 8X% to 7X% in the US. Europe is already a very secular society, I swear that many of the people I know online from Europe don't really personally know any Christians their age.

I talk to people who really have no idea about Christianity, and don't think that Christians are reasonable or rational people. It doesn't help that those they see in the news are creationists in Kansas or proposition 8 supporters in California or anti-sex ed people? Note that I am not arguing that any of the above points are wrong or right, I am just saying that they see these things which don't appear very rational in their view, and they are all their experience with Christians is, and they aren't likely to seriously consider something if they consider it irrational.

So I know that the SDA church has positions, and I am not saying we should change them... but how do we reach out to people who consider Christians as alien basically?

And then we have the other issue of secularism, which is that everry day life isn't very conductive towards a spiritual life. There is a culture that is presented in our TV, by our friends, in our music, in our books, and even in our churches... and it isn't one of following God. But Christians are already foreign to so many, we can't become foreign to those who are immersed in secular culture/etc.

JM

 

[AzA]

I have found the best way to approach people is through the lens of what we share -- humanity. There is no down side to that. I lose nothing of myself; they lose nothing of themselves; but we both gain connection and a basis on which to grow.

 

[JonMiller]

A lot of my friends are atheists. Or at least, non-Christians. They ask me "How can you believe in such stuff?".

So I ask, what do you mean by your statement?

JM
(Most of the rest of my friends are nonpracticing Christians/Muslims)

 

[Byfaithalone1]

So the US is joining Europe in becoming more secular. There was some report recently that the % of Christians have dropped from 8X% to 7X% in the US. Europe is already a very secular society, I swear that many of the people I know online from Europe don't really personally know any Christians their age.

I talk to people who really have no idea about Christianity, and don't think that Christians are reasonable or rational people. It doesn't help that those they see in the news are creationists in Kansas or proposition 8 supporters in California or anti-sex ed people? Note that I am not arguing that any of the above points are wrong or right, I am just saying that they see these things which don't appear very rational in their view, and they are all their experience with Christians is, and they aren't likely to seriously consider something if they consider it irrational.

So I know that the SDA church has positions, and I am not saying we should change them... but how do we reach out to people who consider Christians as alien basically?

And then we have the other issue of secularism, which is that everry day life isn't very conductive towards a spiritual life. There is a culture that is presented in our TV, by our friends, in our music, in our books, and even in our churches... and it isn't one of following God. But Christians are already foreign to so many, we can't become foreign to those who are immersed in secular culture/etc.

JM

It's a good question.

Your post reminds me of John 17. How am I to be "in the world" but not "of the world." Some conclude that the best way to avoid being "of the world" is to avoid being "in the world," but that isn't our commission.

Perhaps Task #1 is to sort out which of our list of "no-nos" actually come from God, and which are "no-nos" that we have imposed upon ourselves. Is our definition of "secular" based on that which God expects, or that which we expect?

BFA

 

[sentipente]

A lot of my friends are atheists. Or at least, non-Christians. They ask me "How can you believe in such stuff?".

So I ask, what do you mean by your statement?

Why don't you simply answer their question? The truth is that lots of what Christians claim to believe defies logic. Your response to them does not help.

 

[JonMiller]

Huh? I Don't respond to my friends by saying "What do you mean by your statement".

I am responding to AzA by asking him what he means by his statement. I guess you can read it that way, if I had responded to my friends by saying "What do you mean by your statement" I would have put it in quotes.

JM

 

[JonMiller]

And they aren't asking me about creationism or whatever, they are asking me about believing in God.

The other things were my examples of they use as examples of irrationality. As I think I have said here before, I am pro-gay marriage and think that evolution is the correct science/etc.

JM

 

[sentipente]

And they aren't asking me about creationism or whatever, they are asking me about believing in God.

The other things were my examples of they use as examples of irrationality. As I think I have said here before, I am pro-gay marriage and think that evolution is the correct science/etc.

JM

Thanks for explaining your other question to Aza. I made a few assumptions there, but it is all clear now.

I don't believe in God either. This does not mean that I do not believe in the Being that Christians worship as God. I mean that the idea of godness is a human creation. Humans decide what their god is and then they relate to that being or thing in particular ways. The interesting thing is that the power of the god depends on the worshipper not on the god himself, because the worshipper's belief prevents him from doing certain things.

I believe in a Creator. No one can deny that there is a Creator. I also believe that the Creator is the Ruler of all Creation. There is no other Being in the universe capable of challenging him.

In the beginning there was no god. In the beginning there was a Creator and a Ruler. Years later man created god.

I would ask the same questions your friends ask of you.

 

[AzA]

...How do we reach out to people who consider Christians as alien basically?

I have found the best way to approach people is through the lens of what we share -- humanity. There is no down side to that. I lose nothing of myself; they lose nothing of themselves; but we both gain connection and a basis on which to grow.

I am responding to AzA by asking him what he means by his statement. I guess you can read it that way, if I had responded to my friends by saying "What do you mean by your statement" I would have put it in quotes.

I'm a girl.

When I speak with someone I don't see them first as Republican, Vietnamese, fundamentalist, and electrician, or whatever other categories they might identify with. I see them first as human and as my brother or sister, and for me that means a non-negotiable baseline of openness, respect, and care. I also understand there are experiences and needs common to all humans regardless of their religious or political beliefs and social background or status. I often base my relationships on those common areas. When people understand that I'm interested in their well-being and will always encourage them to be about that as well, we're often able to have some wonderful discussions about the unique ideas we each have and where life has taken us so far.

I have never had a friend ask me anything close to "How can you believe that stuff?" I have been asked "Why XYZ" or "But what do you think about ABC; doesn't DEF contradict XYZ?" And we move the conversation along from there. I am not interested in converting people out of strongly held positions. I'm not interested in their attempts to convert me. I am often interested in what has persuaded them in a particular direction, how it has affected the way they experience the world, how it changes their action in the world, and what they plan to contribute to the common good.

I don't have a great deal of patience for people who critique without action. This may be why I keep being moved into communities full of such people: I'm probably being asked to develop more patience.

 

[JonMiller]

I don't think any of my friends would ever suggest that I have tried to convert them. Maybe that is a good thing on my part, maybe that is a failure. I don't know.

I don't go about preaching to them or telling them that they should live their lives like Christians. I am just a friend, and am open about the fact that I am Christian (I Don't seek to hide it).

The fact that I am friends with people who despise Christianity should tell you that.

And I think I might agree with Senti in that God is a position, as much as a description of a Being. The creator of the universe/ruler of the universe might not be God, I wouldn't choose to worship him then.

But you say that no one can deny that there is a Creator. I can tell you that (some of) my friends response to you would be the same as their response to me, namely "How can you believe in such stuff?"

Personally I see a belief in a Creator and Ruler of the Universe to be the big belief. And it is currently, and for the forseeable future, scientifically neutral. But I don't see how someone who beleives in a Creator or Ruler of the Universe then has problems with thinking that water can be turned to wine, or the resurrection of the dead, or walking on water. I don't beleive in those things either. I do think that those things are entirely possible, when we are talking about power like the Creator/Ruler of the Universe would have.

Maybe it is just because I read speculative fiction. But there, there are stories with all those types of things easily imagined for some race with higher technology then ours. And that is just with technology, most beleifs in a Creator/Ruler of the Universe are of the supernatural variety (from our previous discussions, yours are as well), if we can imagine technology that can do those things, how much more so can it be imagined that a supernatural being can do such things?!

Really, those people who have problems with believing in miracles just have a God that is too small.

And as for the Creator/Ruler of the Universe, if He isn't Good, then I wouldn't worship Him as I do now.

JM

 

[sentipente]

But you say that no one can deny that there is a Creator. I can tell you that (some of) my friends response to you would be the same as their response to me, namely "How can you believe in such stuff?"

The same way they can believe in abiogenesis. I believe in an eternal creator and they believe what has been proven to be impossible, that something can come out of nothing. I would love to have them make that case to me.

 

[sentipente]

I don't think that organized religion, with its foundation in divisive rhetoric, can have any relevance in the new secular society. Secular does not mean non-religious; it means non-sectarian. But religious principles are eternal and always relevant.

 

[Avonia]

I don't think that organized religion, with its foundation in divisive rhetoric, can have any relevance in the new secular society.

My greatest hope for the SDA church is that it becomes completely irrelevant in its current form - and survives the metamorphosis.

 

[AzA]

My greatest hope for the SDA church is that it becomes completely irrelevant in its current form - and survives the metamorphosis.

Ha.... once upon a time I would have said you have stolen my thunder... But there is enough thunder to go around and I'm about to unload some of it in the strategic plan thread, lol!

 

[Byfaithalone1]

I'd really love to see some possible definitions of "secular." How would we define this word?

BFA

 

[JonMiller]

sec⋅u⋅lar

   /ˈsɛk

yə

lər/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [sek-yuh-ler] Show IPA –adjective 1. of or pertaining to worldly things or to things that are not regarded as religious, spiritual, or sacred; temporal: secular interests. 2. not pertaining to or connected with religion (opposed to sacred ): secular music. 3. (of education, a school, etc.) concerned with nonreligious subjects. 4. (of members of the clergy) not belonging to a religious order; not bound by monastic vows (opposed to regular ). 5. occurring or celebrated once in an age or century: the secular games of Rome. 6. going on from age to age; continuing through long ages.
To begin with.

I would think the pertinent definition would be something along the lines of (1) and (2) with the modification of adding 'perceived' there for Senti (And probably Avonia and AzA).

JM

 

[AzA]

I'd probably be ok with using that perception-based definition, though I don't share the root perception. Thanks, Jon.

Disagree with senti on the non-sectarian connection, though that's the form secularism took in America.
The Latin word referred to "this present age/world" -- in contrast to one to come. And the world to come was deferred to religion.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

So how do we determine whether something pertains to worldly things or to things that are not regarded as religious, spiritual, or sacred?

BFA

 

[JonMiller]

Very simply, what do people not regard as religious, spiritual or sacred?

JM

 

[Byfaithalone1]

Very simply, what do people not regard as religious, spiritual or sacred?

So the term "secular" is an ever changing concept based on the opinions of people? If so, then I can confirm that such has certainly been my experience with the word.

Let's consider an example. Is a tennis game sacred or secular?

BFA