Cancelling Dr. Seuss

[apl68]

Christianity is about love, not judgement. Jesus said that he did not come into the world to condemn it but to save it.

Larimar

Well...the New Testament message contains both the good news of love and the bad news of coming judgement.  Summed up pretty concisely in John 3:16-19:

For God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.  For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved.  He who believes on him is not condemned.  He who does not believe stands condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.  And this is the condemnation:  the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness, rather than the light, because their deeds were evil.

It's a pretty stark choice--believe that Jesus was who he said he was and commit to following him and living according to his teachings, or decide we'd rather not and face the consequences.  And trying to follow Jesus + X isn't going to work either, whether X is one's own nation or race (Christian Nationalism), money (Prosperity Gospel), or the idea that it's okay to shag whomever or whatever one pleases as long as one is "in love."  Every time I see a "God, guns, and Trump" sign (Which fortunately isn't too often around here, contrary to what some might assume about our neck of the woods) I'm reminded of how God made a point of saying "You shall have no other gods but me." 

I mean, it's not popular, and it sounds judgmental, but it's the basic New Testament message.  We all have things in our lives we need to put aside if we're going to follow Jesus.  Maybe this sounds arrogant from the outside looking in, but I promise you that anybody who has truly committed to a Christian life has had to adopt an attitude of great humility.  Because becoming a Christian means accepting that we, personally, have messed up and have only God's mercy to appeal to.

[Diogenes]

Is a President of a publicly funded college front-loading Christianity as their reason for banning a drag show from campus "Cancel Culture"?
Asking for a friend who wants to know if this guy is also a "Snowflake" and if we should be worried about his "Political Correctness."

https://twitter.com/TheFIREorg/status/1637997742617251845?

[Kron3007]

Real Christian values do not include judgmentalism and hypocrisy. Those are the characteristics that Jesus called the scribes and Pharisees "a nest of vipers" and "whitewashed tombs" for. I am Christian but not evangelical. It really grieves me that people think that Christian equals judgmental hypocrite. Those are traits of Christianity gone off the rails and not following Jesus. Christianity is about love, not judgement. Jesus said that he did not come into the world to condemn it but to save it.

Larimar

This is generally the argument, and it is valid, of course. 

The trouble is that people DO use Christianity for all sorts of things.  Often they have support from other Christians.  So if we view this debate in purely practical terms, you are correct, but that does not stop the weirdos from thinking they are doing Christ's work by claiming allegiance to some Biblical tenet.

Putin claims he is protecting ethnic Russians in Ukraine. People will use all kinds of justifications for their actions; that doesn't mean that others will think those justifications are sufficient or even rational. Some of my ancestors came from Northern Ireland. That doesn't make me agree with everything done by either "side" during The Troubles.Not remotely.

And yet, enough Russians agree that it is reasonable to say that Russia supports his actions.  I'm sure many don't, but as a group, they are sanctioning it and supporting it.

In the.case of the church, there are many examples of this.  Manifest destiny and the doctrine of discovery are a couple good examples.  Perhaps not all Christians believed they had the right to evict people from their land, but it was/is official church policy and was used to justify all sorts of atteocities.  These likely would have happened with or without the church, but it was used as a tool to justify and legitimise it

[marshwiggle]

Real Christian values do not include judgmentalism and hypocrisy. Those are the characteristics that Jesus called the scribes and Pharisees "a nest of vipers" and "whitewashed tombs" for. I am Christian but not evangelical. It really grieves me that people think that Christian equals judgmental hypocrite. Those are traits of Christianity gone off the rails and not following Jesus. Christianity is about love, not judgement. Jesus said that he did not come into the world to condemn it but to save it.

Larimar

This is generally the argument, and it is valid, of course. 

The trouble is that people DO use Christianity for all sorts of things.  Often they have support from other Christians.  So if we view this debate in purely practical terms, you are correct, but that does not stop the weirdos from thinking they are doing Christ's work by claiming allegiance to some Biblical tenet.

Putin claims he is protecting ethnic Russians in Ukraine. People will use all kinds of justifications for their actions; that doesn't mean that others will think those justifications are sufficient or even rational. Some of my ancestors came from Northern Ireland. That doesn't make me agree with everything done by either "side" during The Troubles.Not remotely.

And yet, enough Russians agree that it is reasonable to say that Russia supports his actions.  I'm sure many don't, but as a group, they are sanctioning it and supporting it.

In the.case of the church, there are many examples of this.  Manifest destiny and the doctrine of discovery are a couple good examples.  Perhaps not all Christians believed they had the right to evict people from their land, but it was/is official church policy and was used to justify all sorts of attrocities.  These likely would have happened with or without the church, but it was used as a tool to justify and legitimise it

So by that logic, Russia is a bad country, and Russians are bad people, and the world would be better off if Russia had never existed or ceased to exist.

[Langue_doc]

The NYC Audubon just erased Audubon, who died before the Civil War, from their organization. I'm not sure how erasing the name of someone who lived in an era when most affluent people had slaves would further the stated cause of supporting birds and their environment.

At a time when birds are threatened by climate change, habitat loss, and the risks of built infrastructure in urban environments, it is more vital than ever that we enlist support from allies, partners, and the public.

The email sent to members had a 5 AM timestamp.

[nebo113]

From Marshwiggle:  While those were all Old Testament practices, they had all pretty much gone by the early church. To what extent then, does the NT supercede the OT? If the NT takes precedence, does that suggest that the OT is not truly the Word of God?

[marshwiggle]

From Marshwiggle:  While those were all Old Testament practices, they had all pretty much gone by the early church. To what extent then, does the NT supercede the OT? If the NT takes precedence, does that suggest that the OT is not truly the Word of God?

Since this has been discussed for centuries, and by people with far more insight than I have, I'll just give the brief synopsis of the idea of ongoing revelation. To put it in relation to the discussion here, the idea is that as the society changed, God's message and actions changed. The world at the time of the Pharaohs was a lot different than the world at the time of the Roman empire, (which are both very different than our world now), so reading everything while ignoring the context of the audience at the time it was written is either disingenuous or stupid.

[Kron3007]

Real Christian values do not include judgmentalism and hypocrisy. Those are the characteristics that Jesus called the scribes and Pharisees "a nest of vipers" and "whitewashed tombs" for. I am Christian but not evangelical. It really grieves me that people think that Christian equals judgmental hypocrite. Those are traits of Christianity gone off the rails and not following Jesus. Christianity is about love, not judgement. Jesus said that he did not come into the world to condemn it but to save it.

Larimar

This is generally the argument, and it is valid, of course. 

The trouble is that people DO use Christianity for all sorts of things.  Often they have support from other Christians.  So if we view this debate in purely practical terms, you are correct, but that does not stop the weirdos from thinking they are doing Christ's work by claiming allegiance to some Biblical tenet.

Putin claims he is protecting ethnic Russians in Ukraine. People will use all kinds of justifications for their actions; that doesn't mean that others will think those justifications are sufficient or even rational. Some of my ancestors came from Northern Ireland. That doesn't make me agree with everything done by either "side" during The Troubles.Not remotely.

And yet, enough Russians agree that it is reasonable to say that Russia supports his actions.  I'm sure many don't, but as a group, they are sanctioning it and supporting it.

In the.case of the church, there are many examples of this.  Manifest destiny and the doctrine of discovery are a couple good examples.  Perhaps not all Christians believed they had the right to evict people from their land, but it was/is official church policy and was used to justify all sorts of attrocities.  These likely would have happened with or without the church, but it was used as a tool to justify and legitimise it

So by that logic, Russia is a bad country, and Russians are bad people, and the world would be better off if Russia had never existed or ceased to exist.

No, but it may indicate that the current Russian leadership is rotten and should ideally be replaced.  I suppose a major difference is that the Pope/church is the direct spokesman for God and have moral authority over their members, so it is pretty hard to disagree.  Modern Russia accomplishes a similar feat through law and censorship, but it is much easier if you can just play the God card.

I don't think many people here have been arguing that religion (or Russia asa whole) is evil and should be abolished, just that it can, and has, been used for nefarious purposes and should not be involved in creating or enforcing law. 

Also worth noting that Putin has indeed used these Russian Church to validate his actions.

[Wahoo Redux]

So by that logic, Russia is a bad country, and Russians are bad people, and the world would be better off if Russia had never existed or ceased to exist.

At this point in time...if Russia ceased to exist we could all breathe a sigh of relief.

I'm sure glad we have Tchaikovsky and Russian realism in literature.  I'm glad the Russians were there to beat down Napoleon and Hitler.  But now Russia is a rogue nation bringing us closer to the brink of world war. 

The point is, however (as Kron says), that we shouldn't have the Russians or the church making rules for everyone----neither can be trusted.  We need not destroy the church or ignore all it has given us, but we should also acknowledge the dark side of religion. 

[apl68]

The NYC Audubon just erased Audubon, who died before the Civil War, from their organization. I'm not sure how erasing the name of someone who lived in an era when most affluent people had slaves would further the stated cause of supporting birds and their environment.

At a time when birds are threatened by climate change, habitat loss, and the risks of built infrastructure in urban environments, it is more vital than ever that we enlist support from allies, partners, and the public.

The email sent to members had a 5 AM timestamp.

Well, the mission of the Audobon societies goes far beyond what he did back in the day, so I guess there's no compelling reason to keep his name, pioneering figure or not.  The emerging consensus that we see to the effect that anybody who ever owned slaves or voiced support for slavery was unspeakably evil and must be erased from historical memory as anything other than a despicable enslaver bears careful consideration.  Many of the same people who are calling for this sort of re-evaluation of white historical figures have a soft spot for the cultures and rulers of pre-colonial Africa, India, Mesoamerica, etc.  And yet these were slave societies whose rulers often exercised the power of life and death over their subjects. 

Was a black African ruler who conquered his neighbors and enslaved others more acceptable than a white ruler who did the same sorts of things?  If so, what made him or her so?  If we of today are entitled to judge and condemn the people of the past for not being us, then I doubt there's much of anybody, of any culture or color or gender, who would ultimately hold up to scrutiny.  And if the people of the past are to be written off as wicked, then how is it that we of today are so certain that we are more righteous than they were?

[marshwiggle]

So by that logic, Russia is a bad country, and Russians are bad people, and the world would be better off if Russia had never existed or ceased to exist.

At this point in time...if Russia ceased to exist we could all breathe a sigh of relief.

I'm sure glad we have Tchaikovsky and Russian realism in literature.  I'm glad the Russians were there to beat down Napoleon and Hitler.  But now Russia is a rogue nation bringing us closer to the brink of world war. 

The point is, however (as Kron says), that we shouldn't have the Russians or the church making rules for everyone----neither can be trusted.  We need not destroy the church or ignore all it has given us, but we should also acknowledge the dark side of religion.

"The church" doesn't make rules for everyone. Except maybe just after the time of Jesus when "the church" consisted of a small number of people who knew him personally, there hasn't been any time when "the church" has had a completely unified voice. All through church history there have been various groups who disagreed with each other over things major or minor. Since "the church" is always made up of fallible human beings, it will always fall far short of what it aspires to be. (And that's not even counting people who are actually fraudulently claiming some sort of religious affiliation to try to trick people into something.)

The easiest place to find people who can tell you about awful things that Christians (or "the church") have done is in church. Just like the easiest place to find people who know all of my flaws is in my family.

"The church", like every individual within it, is implicitly a work in progress. Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't really understand what Christianity is about.

[Wahoo Redux]

You do realize, Marshy, that Christians with your beliefs are not the ones we are worried about, right?  Although I don't know that what you say there is necessarily what past comments reflect.

[marshwiggle]

You do realize, Marshy, that Christians with your beliefs are not the ones we are worried about, right?  Although I don't know that what you say there is necessarily what past comments reflect.

Given the high percentage of people who identify as Christian in the US, if most of them ascribed to the very conservative views that people worry about they would have a massively bigger effect than they do. Just goes to show that "Christians" like "white people" or "black people" is a much more diverse group than many suggest, and treating them as monolithic is similarly unproductive.

[kaysixteen]

I've been doin' some cogitatin' on this, and it is clear that most American non-Christians should acknowledge a couple of things, namely that Christianity is largely the basis for the tradiitonal morality/ mores of America, things that differentiate us say from India or Oman, and that most of said non-believers largely would agree with most of those distinctively Christian, or Christianity-based, mores, *with the current main exceptions more or less only being in the areas of sexuality and abortion.

[Kron3007]

I've been doin' some cogitatin' on this, and it is clear that most American non-Christians should acknowledge a couple of things, namely that Christianity is largely the basis for the tradiitonal morality/ mores of America, things that differentiate us say from India or Oman, and that most of said non-believers largely would agree with most of those distinctively Christian, or Christianity-based, mores, *with the current main exceptions more or less only being in the areas of sexuality and abortion.

Sure, just as Christians should acknowledge that the majority of their Christian values are derived from previous religious/pagan and other sources.  It is a continuum, and our society is constantly evolving.  Just as Christians shed some of the more perverse practices of their predecessors, secular society is doing the same with what we inherited. We don't need to throw out the baby with the bath water.