Do gratuitous references to "Xtians" or "Xians" bother anyone else?

I have no doubt that I could come up with a cutely disparaging name for atheists and agnostics, but I have neither the time nor the inclination. To do so would only align me with Michael Savage and his "Islamofascists" or Pigboy and the "feminazis". Believer or non-believer, I honestly don't care, and have no need to demean your stance. But Christian is NOT synonymous with knuckle-dragging, Fundie, drooler. This Christian believes in Gay marriage, stem-cell research, and a woman's right to choose - including intact dilation and extraction - (There is no such procedure as partial-birth abortion. It is a bullshit term coined to inflame the right-wing.) Why, then, do some feel that they must attempt to belittle my faith?

The X was what the earlier christians used to represent themselves: it's actually the greek letter chi, which with the greek letter rho, was the early symbol for followers of Christ. It's not intended as a slur, it's just the historical abbreviation.

.. that many of my christian friends use to describe themselves.

It's a constant reminder of the cross - both that Jesus bore and that they (we) must bear every day.

--------------------
Store: www.cafepress.com/tesibria.com (All proceeds go to buy PROGRESSIVE books and magazines for small town ("red") library.)
Blog: www.democracyiscoming.com

because while it is a true symbol, there is not one Christian alive today who really detests when someone X's out Christ for we KNOW it is meant to be derogatory. But, it really is no BIG deal for "they know not what they do".

:eyes:

funny how it is mocked humiliity when it does not just lay down and beg for mercy from those attacking. Hahah. It really matters not one iota. "X" all ya want. Changes naught. Glory!

That's all I meant, but you can spin it however you want.

to me it's a non-issue. shorthand, nothing else.

I thought it was just a contraction...

or as a way to distinguish fundies. Being Christian, I give them the benefit of the doubt.

Matter of fact, if one does a School of Divinity study..they'd find that the term Christian was a slur on those followers of Christ after his "movement" started to grow..Strange how stuff works out.

Former fundie here. No offense intended :hi:

And if you're that worry, why don't you try to study the context, hmm?

Not specific to any particular religion and allows that most religious people are good and decent people.

dont even want to say the word Christian.

an "Xian" who believes in progressive principles.

The "X" doesn't trouble me in the least.

Stands for Christ. Read your history.

I use Xian/Xtain a lot, and it's just an abbreviation. Although I am an atheist, I know that good CHRISTians do exist - just that they're harder and harder to find.

This is the first reference I found on google. No doubt there are better.

http://wilstar.com/xmas/xmassymb.htm

"Xmas
This abbreviation for Christmas is of Greek origin. The word for Christ in Greek is Xristos. During the 16th century, Europeans began using the first initial of Christ's name, "X" in place of the word Christ in Christmas as a shorthand form of the word. Although the early Christians understood that X stood for Christ's name, later Christians who did not understand the Greek language mistook "Xmas" as a sign of disrespect."


Later Christians, who lack knowledge (who could that refer to?) MISTOOK the X as a sign of disrespect.

X-mas either.

-------------------------------------
Would Jesus love a liberal? You bet!
http://geocities.com/greenpartyvoter/

X corresponds to the first letter of Christ in Greek -- I do not understand your faith, but abbreviation is not a way of belittling it

"the Democrat Party," a favorite RW slur.

I don't know whether it's intended to offend or not, but most of the Christians I know, do not like x-mas, etc, either because it omits "Christ". For all the history buffs, thanks for the lesson, but I don't consider myself an X. :)

are Christian but left the Christ part out but it seems clear that it is a legit abbreviation so I guess I will stopp using it to offend and you can stop being offended,lol.

Ooops. Damn.

:thumbsup:

I mean it sounds like DUfus...or some sound a DUmmy makes...

DUH DUH DUH

"Dee YOU er"

I can see how the unenlightened might mistake the letters D-U as being pronounced as "duh"... but it wouldn't bother me. It's kind of funny actually.

-- Allen

if such a small thing bothers you this much?

1) It is not belittling to differ profoundly with the premises of your belief.

2) Separate from answer #1, there is a pernicious version of Christianity that is gaining influence in this country, and it is frightening.

We know the difference between sincere believers and the Pharisees. We don't share the premises of either group, though.

there is a difference between ATHEISTS, AGNOSTICS and ANTITHEISTS...

Atheists and agnostics normally do not despise religion, they just disagree with it on rational or logical terms. Those folks are great, and its easy to see where they are coming from. I have no problem with atheists or agnostics, and they have no problem with me...True atheists respect religion, but they wish to be apart from it and its influence.

The antitheists, on the other hand, are just as fanatical as the people they disagree with because they feel it is their mission to convince people of the invalidity of religion--they become proseltyzers against religion. This is different from wanting to be free from religion...this is in the realm of fascism. Everyone MUST agree with them that religion is invalid, evil, or bad....you can tell its a dogma with them by HOW they react to disagreement on the issue of religion.

Its an understandable reaction to personal experience: usually the antitheists have had bad personal experiences with an overbearing sect or overreligious relatives, and have rejected religion as a whole personally. They react viscerally to religion and tend to lump all christians together instead of seeing the spectrum from liberal to right wing. I don't blame them for their hatred

Even so, You have to see it from their point of view. They aren't going to be respectful anytime soon because they feel they have suffered under the flag of christianity, both in their personal life and public society. Therefore they use "xtians" as their way of protesting the religion. It doesn't bother me, though I suspect it is intended to bother me. I know that most of their objections are with right wing religious nuts, and it doesn't apply to liberal christians like myself.

let them have their labels. It makes them feel better and shouldn't bother us.

to your classifications

I tend to see myself as an atheist, although you might consider me to be antitheist to some extent -- that is to say, I do not understand why people believe in God/gods/etc. at all. That said, all christians, wherever they are found on the political spectrum, have the quality of believing in God that makes no sense to me. That is the only sense in which I lump them together.

you're just saying you don't understand the belief, and it makes no sense to you...that's a rational, logical argument. Where it would shift to antitheists is if you attacked them for having that belief, or felt they should "wise up" to your way of thinking.

Agreed, that can be a thin line at times. But in the same way that I do not fully understand Islam, I respect them and don't expect them to adopt my belief as the truth before I will count their own beliefs as valid.

go through a period of anger and resent the sneering from Christians. This is normal, especiallyif they have been indoctrinated into a religion first.

Take for instance the reference in the header to atheists and agnostics implying that it is atheists or agnostics that use the insult, as it is viewed by that author, of the X exclusively for purposes of mockery.

The X was used long , long ago by monks making notes in pages of Christian writings or theology etc. and as pointed out in previous threads the X is the Greek symbol for Chi.

I know from personal experience that the idea the the Christ is taken out of Xmas is a meme taught by Catholics because I was taught that when a student in parochial school.

and those atheists who are '"good", ( I am using tongue in cheek), atheists actually don't care too much about anyone's religion if it does not hurt them, in spite of the fact that every religion in existance brands them as infidels and many view atheists as somehow tainted or better yet, "missing something" they have. That is indeed insulting to an atheist.

Why is it required, anyhow, that atheists "respect" another's religion? I see little to no respect from a lot of Christians for the so called fundies,yet if an athesit asserts an atheistic view, honestly with no malice, toward the "real" or "true" Christians they are disrespectful and apologies are often demanded.

I don't respect your beliefs, but I respect your right to believe whatever you want.

--IMM

And we are the most peaceful of people, discounted by all--religious and athiest alike. We did nothing to anyone and are STILL laughed at by all.

check your insides
if they are in good health then it would not matter

While it represents the Greek letter "Chi", the cross, and the older Christians even referred to themselves as Xtians, I will never forget the long rant I had in Bible School as a child where this rabid fundie woman went off about how "Satans people are trying to take the "Christ" out of Christmas by writing X-mas."

She had most people in the room convinced they would burn in Hell if they ever supported a company that wrote X-mas, or wrote it themselves.

Freaks.

...I do think it's meant to bother people, the way that Republicans keep referring to us as the "Democrat" party rather than the Democratic Party. I don't think anyone would be so adamant about using a different name rather than the one a group uses to refer to itself unless it had some significance.

Religion itself is responsible for this ugliness.

There seems to be a lot of that going on around here these days.

and you see there are at least some that use it as insult...the walk off line -- "freaks"...sums up the attitude fairly well.

The INTENT and MEANING of the words are less important than the spelling of them. Following that 'logic' to its conclusion, one could argue that the statement "Xians are good people" could be considered insulting. (Again, forget the intent and message... just concentrate on the spelling, eh?)

Regarding the post you pointed out (#22) I didn't see the word "freaks" as being against ALL of Xtianity. It seemed to be directed at the only the excessively hypersensitive folks who see insults in any comment that's NOT glowing.

It sounds like the "attitude" you object to is nothing more than a sarcastic observation. Shall we forbid sarcasm too?

-- Allen

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I was wondering when you might show up.

otherwise, it's xtian. The difference is obvious and intentional to me. To xtians, Jesus is a liability, on the margins, just some weird guy in sandals they barely tolerate and basically ignore all his teachings. They tend to worship Paul and the OT blood and guts.
A "real" Christian follows Christ and his teachings and believes he is the New Covenant. Thats my take.

But our concerns are not legitimate, because they cannot separate Christians from neo-cons. It really is unfortunate.

The term has come to refer to a political agenda more than to personal faith. And I want nothing of that agenda.

I typically don't use the term xian. I prefer to distinquish between different types of christians. I do use the term fundie to refer to the fundamentalist christians who are most avid, egregious and offensive in pursuing their agenda. I also recognize that there are liberal christians who want nothing of that agenda.

it is my opinion that the word "christian" is now understood in many circles to refer to a political agenda rather than to one's personal faith. It is an agenda with which I strongly disagree.

I am well versed and trained in the christian faith. I spent seven years studying at Six Flags over Jesus. My faith is the bedrock of who I am and what I believe. But my core spirituality and beliefs are something very different from organized religion. My faith is something that is exclusively mine to choose and mine to live. My faith is my own. There is a portion of Scripture that says that each of us are to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling. I do not find it necessary to explain, defend or label my faith. If I were to do so, you might call me "christian."

Don't.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Can you imagine the outcry if someone were to say "I don't call black folks lazy even though each and every one of them are."

It's abhorrent for me to even type out that idiotic example, but maybe it will help you to understand what you're doing.

-- Allen

to take back their religion. What I see of Christianity ain't pretty and it sure as hell is not christian. Don't whine at us because the perception of Christianity has been damaged. What did you guys do to fight this trend?

we're losing! It doesn't help to get the message out when our Dem comrades insist on perpetuating the myth that the Democratic party belittles & mocks Christianity. We're fighting this battle on both sides for crying out loud...

I live in a red state. I hate being lumped into those "f'ing red states", but do you see me here whining and sobbing about it? No! I realize that the company that I keep (geographically) needs to change before my state will ever be accepted as anything but a bunch of knuckle-dragging, gun-toting, God-fearing, homophobic, bigoted racists...

So what do I do? I try to change these people one at a time and I seek out others like me who are stuck in red states.

Followers of the teachings of Jesus Christ who don't want to be associated with the fundamentalist cult that has made itself known as "Christianity" need to fix the people among them and fix their religion. As far as I am concerned, Christianity is a doomsday cult of bigoted, hateful fundamentalists. The good people who label themselves with this cult's label need to take back the label and the religion. Those of us who do not believe in their religion can't fix it for them, they have to fix it for themselves from the inside out.

And instead of complaining about being "misunderstood" they need to be going to their preachers, their congregations, and taking a stand for their beliefs. And if their church is one of the fundie cults, they need to leave their churches and stop financially supporting them, and find a decent place of worship.

got any suggestions on how a united church of christ member is going to change the thinking of a fundamentalist? no, really...how do yo propose this happen?

I don't attend their churches, they don't attend mine, I never come into contact with them on religious issues or situations. How do you propose I "take back my religion"?

Further, your assumption that christianity is monolithic and can be changed from the "inside out" only highlights your ignorance. There are a multitude of denominations, many of which are as distrustful of each other as they are of different religions. Baptists hate catholics and think they aren't christian, Unitarians are open to a wide variety of thought, but Pentecostals don't allow their women to cut their hair or wear pants. The Amish shun technology and the Christian Scientists don't use the health care system. United Church of Christ holds many prochoice rallies and Operation Rescue actually encourages killing abortion doctors. I could go on and on, but the point is that trying to change everyone's religious views is not only impossibly unwieldy, it is also against the concept of free will that LIBERAL christians espouse...it would require a Saddam Hussein with a rod of iron to control and force all the denominations into monolithic thinking, and THEN I think you'd not be happy with the result, because it would be WORSE than it is now.

I completely understand your anger against the religious right and how they were manipulated by Rove into voting in the antichrist, I'm angry about it as well, but unless you have practical suggestions on how to change reality (and I'm positive you don't, because there aren't any), then I suggest you work harder on changing secular republicans into secular democrats....and stop chiding us. If your intent is to drive liberal christians AWAY from the democratic party...keep it up.

Ignorance?

I was a member of a Christian church from birth until I was 18. Even today I get their weekly mailing, although I have moved several times. (My mother keeps giving them my new address.)

There were years on end where my life was thusly:
Sunday - Bible school & Sermon in the AM - Sermon in the PM
Monday - Friday - Christian School
Wednesday PM - Wednesday night dinner
Saturday - Basketball games in the church gymnasiums

Yes, I lived at that church 7 days a week for at least five years, and more throughout the time I was a member.

I've sat through more Christian bullshit than most people could ever hope to. And I know that Christianity can be changed from the inside out! It HAS to be. And if your non-fundamentalist church isn't nuts then yay for you, but if you want anyone to take your religion seriously you must work to fix the crazies in it.

You write "if your intent is to drive liberal christians AWAY from the democratic party...keep it up." I say, if you are such a pussy that people decrying the crazies in your religion drives you away, then you're a shitty Democrat in the first place.

Listen Lerkfish, I've sat in horror and watched Elders and Deacons wives talk about how much they hated working with "niggers" in the public schools where they worked, not an hour after they took communion! I was only ten. I couldn't leave the church then (my mother, one of the nice Christian ladies who started this conversation, would never let me do that).

I responded by disassociating myself with Christianity as soon as I could, after seeing firsthand what a horrid cult of racist, hateful bigots it was. And trust me, in the 18 years I was stuck as a member of that church, the crazies far outweighed the decent folks.

If keeping the same label as these nice ladies is more important to you than being moral, then so be it. If you have to leave the "democratic" party because the fundamentalist Christians have ruined the label of your religion, then I have to say you're aiming at the wrong set of people. You should be turning on the Christians who have hijacked your religion and put you into this situation in the first place.

Then again, you may already be too brainwashed for that.

you just up and left, right, rather than change your OWN church.

Just wanted to make sure I got that right:

"I responded by disassociating myself with Christianity as soon as I could, after seeing firsthand what a horrid cult of racist, hateful bigots it was. And trust me, in the 18 years I was stuck as a member of that church, the crazies far outweighed the decent folks."

Just wanted to make clear here you are demanding we change the internal makeup of OTHER churches, but you were unable to do it for your OWN church. you just left and did nothing at all.

ok...got it....do as you SAY, not as you DO.

:spank:

I don't believe in Christianity. I have no desire to change it. I am not a Christian.

If you want to change your religion, that's fine. Don't presume that just because I grew up among rabid fundamentalist Christians means that I believe what they or you believe. I don't.

I believe that Jesus was a really great guy with a really great bunch of followers, but that he was not the son of God. I don't believe there is a God. And by the way I believe Paul is the one who hijacked your religion.

Fix your own religion. It's not mine to fix.

x(

"Fix your own religion. It's not mine to fix."

then what were the last few posts about? You sound a lot like AWOL Bush, unwilling to fight the battle yourself, but excited at sending others into the fray.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

well, apparently you cannot overcome your own prejudice.

>> How do you propose I "take back my religion"? <<

Just a thought... but perhaps a page out of the JW handbook would be in order. Instead of trying to berate and convert the godless heathens, perhaps moderate and liberal Christians could go door-to-door trying to soften the cold hearts of zealots who use their fundamental religion as justification for their bigotry and hurtful RW policies.

If a faction can't be changed from the inside-out (as you say) does that mean that it can be changed from the outside? Or does it mean that it cannot be changed at all?

"Instead of trying to berate and convert the godless heathens"

just that statement alone shows your complete ignorance of who I am, what my religious beliefs are. If you'd like, I could tell you them, instead of you making false accusations like that.

"If a faction can't be changed from the inside-out (as you say) does that mean that it can be changed from the outside? Or does it mean that it cannot be changed at all?"

I'll try to reiterate what I'm saying: The problem with right wing religious zealots is character driven: that means, they are using religion to justify their right wing politics and personal character core rather than understanding what the religion is really about. Its not a fault of the religion itself. Therefore, working to reeducate them on their misunderstanding of religion will not solve the basic problem.

That cannot be changed UNLESS the individual decides to change. There are a lot individuals. You cannot wholesale change their attitudes in a practical way.

For example, you yourself have called christians racist. Let's examine that: there ARE racists in the fundie fold, no doubt about it. Which leads to this: how easy or hard is it to change a racist into an someone who accepts other races? is there a 12-step program? Is there a booklet or a handout? NO. The ONLY way a racist can change is when they DECIDE to on their own...its an internal decision. Up to that point, you can extoll the virtues of diversity until you're blue in the face, but it would make no difference.

look. You appear to be full of anger on this issue, and you appear to want us to "fix" the problem. I'm telling you the problem is not fixable in any real or effective sense, because the problem is character-driven. you cannot force someone to develop a kinder, gentler soul nor inject virtue into someone who resists it.

What "false accusations" are you talking about? I have not accused *you* of anything! I made no statements about *you* nor did I make any judgments about who I think *you* are.

I have no opinions one way or the other about "who you are". Despite what you may want or believe, this isn't about YOU.

>> For example, you yourself have called christians racist. <<

I have? Really? Are you thinking of someone else? If you can show where *I* have said that, then I will apologize for it.

>> ... they are using religion to justify their right wing politics and personal character core rather than understanding what the religion is really about. Its not a fault of the religion itself. <<<

If you are trying to correct me, then you are mistaken about what I believe. If you are reiterating the obvious, then that's fine. We are already in agreement on that point.

>> Therefore, working to reeducate them on their misunderstanding of religion will not solve the basic problem. <<

Stunning! What a remarkable statement! Is this what you MEANT to say, or did some hasty editing leave a sentence that completely defies all logic?

Frankly, I think that some "reeducation" might indeed help and would go a long way into solving the "basic problem". But that's a task for folks who are much more knowledgeable and skilled at such things. It's beyond the scope of what I'm capable of doing.

>> That cannot be changed UNLESS the individual decides to change. <<

And what better way is there to help motivate them to "decide to change"?

Well... I suppose we could try to "reeducate" them about their "misunderstanding of religion" and help them see a different point of view and that their bigotry really isn't justified by their religion.

Oh wait! Rats! That won't work... never mind! Silly me. We've been over this already.

>> look. You appear to be full of anger on this issue, and you appear to want us to "fix" the problem. <<

No... YOU look, Lerkfish!

I do not expect you to "fix" the problem. You're confusing me with another poster who made that suggestion. --- What you did was to ask for ideas, (post 50: "no, really...how do yo propose this happen?") and I gave you one. You rejected the idea then go off on this personal tirade.

>> I'm telling you the problem is not fixable in any real or effective sense, because the problem is character-driven. <<

I cannot explain be held accountable for the unreasonable hypersensitivity that some people have, when it comes to their reactions whenever someone criticizes or speaks harshly about the RW zealot Christians.

I am truly baffled why normally reasonable and liberal Christians come completely unglued whenever deserved scorn is heaped upon one of their bigoted brethren.

The disparagement and anger that's directed at these bigoted RW loons is justified and well-deserved. Yet there are many here who identify themselves as "liberal Christians" who take personal offense and want to defend the RW bigoted Christians. Why?

>> you cannot force someone to develop a kinder, gentler soul nor inject virtue into someone who resists it. <<

So... we should just keep our mouths shut and give them the respect that they deserve because THEIR bigotry is "different"? We must respect that flavor of bigotry and hatred because it flows from their RW fundie version of Christianity... or because they try to disguise their bigotry as an expression of their religion, right?

Well, let's just keep quiet and say nothing more about it. We are impotent to fight their bigotry and call it what it is because... well... they are shielded because it's all done in the name of Christianity.

Hmm... I suppose that will work. Let's give it a try, eh? :eyes:

my post was in response to a DIFFERENT post than yours. I'm not sure why it ended up under yours. Either I glitched or the board did.

(I edited to add: what happened is I responded partly to your post and then partly to dem agog's post. that was an error on my part for which I apologize)

for that reason you are RIGHT to be incensed that it appeared I was accusing you of something you didn't say, because it was a misdirected post. My apologies.

However, to address some of your post: I am NOT defending RW christians, I'm as angered and disappointed in them as the rest of you...probably more so. BUT I reject the notion its MY responsibility to change their bigotry because I'm a liberal christian...for one thing, I've been trying with some relatives, and its remarkably futile. Their heads are encased in rock-hard material that deflects logic. For another thing, except for relatives, I have zero contact with them. They don't go to my church, and I don't attend theirs. You guys probably have more contact with them than I do.
The demands that liberal christians "fix" rw christians smacks of guilt by association. I did not make them that way, nor did my religion. They are off on their own limb, and its a particularly EXCLUSIVE limb, so whereas someone in my church might be openminded enough to entertain alternate religious concepts, their church simply will not do so.

"I am truly baffled why normally reasonable and liberal Christians come completely unglued whenever deserved scorn is heaped upon one of their bigoted brethren."

well, because your statement contains two fallacies: 1. They aren't my brethren, as I've explained. and 2. the "deserved scorn" is being directed at US, not the right wingers, as we get blasted with the same large brush.

because they do happen. But it certainly does not happen with the rampant frequency that many around would have us believe. --- For such assertions (about rampant anti-Christian posts) to be true, we can only assume that the people complaining must be also be lumping-in all the messages which deride RW zealots. --- Where ELSE could they be seeing all these so-called anti-Christian posts? The reality just doesn't bear out the assertions, so the only logical conclusion is that legitimate scorn is being misinterpreted as swipes against ALL Christians.

The evidence show us that whenever someone DOES make unfair broad-brush swipes at Christians in general, they are handled by the moderators and admins.

>> well, because your statement contains two fallacies: 1. They aren't my brethren, as I've explained. <<

Technically speaking, I used the word correctly--they are Christian, you are a Christian--but if you want to disown or disclaim them at a philosophical level, then that's fine.

>> and 2. the "deserved scorn" is being directed at US, not the right wingers, as we get blasted with the same large brush. <<

Many people need to use some common sense when they read the angry posts. In context, it's quite likely that reasonable people will see that the anger is *intended for* and which is indeed directed towards RW zealots.

Surely you can see that your hastily-arrived-at sense of indignation is likely the result of a hastily-written message that failed to include all the legal disclaimers of which subsections ought not be offended and the preemptive apology for anyone who might be offended. -- This is a casual discussion forum. It's not a court of law. For the most part, people around here just don't compose messages like that.

In consideration of all the historical and ongoing atrocities that Christianity legitimately has to answer for, one would think that the reasonable Christian would develop a thicker skin. Exactly what do you expect from people who have been (and who are) truly oppressed by others, all in the name of Christianity? Their reactions, and anger and backlash should come as no surprise to you.

>> The demands that liberal christians "fix" rw christians smacks of guilt by association. <<

Nope. It smacks of a sense of powerlessness. It smacks of a sense of helplessness. As a liberal Christian, you may not be in the perfect position to affect meaningful change... but you are in a better position than those who feel most helpless.

I see no "guilt-by-association"... that's your own mind at work.

So what? You can't handle the problem. Neither can I. I'm ill equipped to confront or convince these people that they are wrong. Someone ELSE who actually IS in a better position will have to do the job.

Thanks for the reply.

-- Allen

That's why I am attempting to work from the inside to try and reclaim my faith from those who would politicize it. It is much the same as my efforts to work within the progressive movement to wrest the mantle of progressive leadership away from those who choose to deride my faith as a "Doomsday cult of bigoted, hateful, fundamentalists".

I mean, there are tons of republicans out there, why haven't you gotten on the ball and brought them back into the democratic fold? Until you do, the perception of democrats has been damaged, and its all your fault.
what did you guys do to fight this trend towards right wing politics?

see? seems ridiculous to say what you just did. The same reasons you cannot change a right wing republican into a democrat are the same reasons liberal christians cannot change a right with christian into a left wing christian.

Because its an internal character issue, which is difficult to change from the outside, if at all. How adamant are republicans to stay republicans? Apply that to religion as well.

I seriously doubt you'll invent any NEW ones.

As for the reference to "X-ians", study your history. The "X" originally was written as a "+", the sign of The Cross, and as such was used by scribes and calligraphers as a sort of "shorthand"

It has been only in the last century that barely-educated "Clergy" most from the "Close-cover-before-striking School of Divinity", in an effort to inflame their flocks, started the "Look! they're crossing CHRIST out of Christmas" Urban Legend. Don't you feel a little silly now, for "going off" on something you didn't have the facts about?

As for "Belittling your Faith", please read this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=2639930&mesg_id=2640544

And get back to us with your thoughts.

Sorry you perceived that as "going off". As for the originations of the term, apart from this thread I have never seen it used in any historical context. Any fair review of its use would conclude that it has appeared most often in Christian-bashing threads as an oh-so-clever means of disparagement. It bothers me a little bit and I said so.

"As for the originations of the term, apart from this thread I have never seen it used in any historical context."

I'd REALLY like to give you a pass on this, REALLY I would.
But, "Ignorance is No Excuse"...

" It bothers me a little bit and I said so."

OK, I grant you that. "Liberal Christians" who piss and moan and WHINE because they think they're being discussed when we rip into the Taliborn-agains and Dominionists bother *ME*, and I have now said so.

I did, however, point out that its use seems more prevelant in Christian-bashing threads. As for your second point, fine. You calmly stated that which bothers you, and I respectfully accept that . The way that you can tell that I will respectfully entertain your opinion is that I won't accuse you of over-reacting, complaining, whining, pissing, or moaning. I'll even leave out the increasingly popular and deeply profound "Boo-hoo".

"As for the originations of the term, apart from this thread I have never seen it used in any historical context."

And....

"I never said I was ignorant of the etymology of the term."

So, which is it? You can't have it both ways.

If you truly were cognizant of the etymology of the term "Xian" you would have knowledge of the historical origins and usage. Your assertion that it is a "Bashing Term" shows me that you are indeed ignorant of the term.

You can claim anything you want, but it would be charitable for me to remind you that when you find yourself in a hole, the best course of action is to STOP DIGGING.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the use of "Xian" dates back to at least 1634 CE.

It's NOT a means of disparagement, it's a way to type faster. I think you owe nearly everyone on this thread an apology for letting your ignorance get the better of you.

and don't hold your breath.

You said:

I have no doubt that I could come up with a cutely disparaging name for atheists and agnostics

If you DIDN'T think that atheists and agnostics simply "came up with" the word Xian to "cutely disparage" Christians, why did you write the above?

Very sad. Didn't Christ preach a lot about humility? Humility includes admitting your mistakes, you know.

your willingness to extrapolate what you believe I may have thought is puzzling. The fact is, I specified atheists and agnostics solely because they represent the other side of the coin. I also said I had neither the time nor the inclination to belittle them. Now, once again for the record, tell us that the use of Xian is not intended to be derogatory but rather is merely a "way to type faster". Then you can make another sanctimonious remark about MY honesty.

You started off this thread attacking others out of ignorance, and it just kind of went downhill from there.

Speaking only for myself, I have never used "Xian" as a way to be derogatory. You can believe that or not, but since you apparently have prejudged "atheists and agnostics," you probably know all too well what I *really* think. :eyes:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

this is a broad swipe at all Christians.

:toast:

When someone ACTUALLY DOES make broad unfair swipes at Christianity, then it's taken care of.

That leads me to believe that the other specific swipes and derision of RW zealot fundy Christians and their bigotry (the posts that ARE NOT deleted) aren't actually as bad as some would have us believe.

Seeing that there's NO SHORTAGE of people who see insults around every corner... and since it's likely that if these folks are complaining publicly, then they are probably clicking "alert" too. So naturally, if they are clicking alert... and if the alerted-on messages are NOT being deleted.... then maybe, just maybe these posts really ARE directed specifically at RW bigots who hide their bigotry behind Christianity.

Hmmm.

what does that do to your "reasoning"?

The fact that something isn't deleted has nothing to do with MY reasoning. (Yeah, I noticed that you put the word 'reasoning' in quotation marks. How clever of you! Very droll. Ha. Ha.)

If something like that is not deleted, then it means that nobody was bothered enough to alert the moderators about it; or that the moderators didn't agree that the perceived insult rose to the level of being in violation of the rules; or that the moderators hadn't yet received the alert or maybe they were trying to reach a consensus on something that was borderline.

I'm a bit surprised that you'd need to ask me about that at all! I'd imagine that you already know enough about deleted messages that you wouldn't need to seek my opinion on such matters.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I guess the moderators just didn't agree with the alert. Try not to let yourself get too worked up about it.

I challenge you to go back through this thread, and count the number of times LIBERAL christians have been attacked for the actions of RW christians...

I WISH it was only a case of me being too sensitive, or of misunderstanding attacks directed at only RW christians.

But, I'm not the one that started complaining about it. If you'll note, my first several posts were attempting to say it doesn't matter, and explaining where the antitheist attitude comes from, which was proven true in Dem agog's case: negative baggage from personal bad experience with religion.

or for doing and saying things that makes it appear as though they are defending the RW zealots for no other reason than the fact they the zealots fall under the broad umbrella of Christianity?

I did note your earlier posts. There are some things that we do agree on, and I've said so before.

One doesn't have to actually defend the RW. Merely "appearing to" defend them (in the eyes of people who think any belief in God is a sign of mental illness) is enough.

It sounds to me like the issue you have is with the Moderators or Admins. Continually following me around, provoking me, antagonizing me, and trying to pick a fight with me is not the solution to whatever it is that troubles you.

x

oh, woe is me!

that is exactly what christian is now. unless we make it not so. being a christian, hey i would be saying it too, i do. lol living in a "christian" enviroment. these people say the christian family down the street. they have defined christian. and we as a nation have allowed it. liten to the news. us christians should have been speaking up before we allowed the definition. so, now this christian, i have let go of the word. and the "christians" i talk to i will tell them, i can no longer use the name they have defined it to be, because in christ conscious, they have walked away from god adn lite. and no one messes with my god thing going on.

but then being a christian,...........i know my relationship with jesus, no one can question me on my experience, not a single man. i challenge each and everyone. i have a crisis of religion going on, but nevah.........have i had a crisis of faith

Go whine about it in some country you don't control.

Go whine about it in some country you don't control.

that's well....warm and fuzzy.

I think everyone should stop slathering liberal christians with the fundie christian brush.

You cant fight intolerance and ignorance with more intolerance and ignorance. If for no other reason, your targeting is off. We're the people working on OUR side. The people you want to hate are the ones working on the OTHER side. mmmmkay?

To me a "Xian" is a knuckle-dragging, Fundie, drooler! They have forsaken the teaching of Christ, so, in my opinion, do NOT deserve to be called Christians, which bares His name! They took Christ out of their hearts, I took it out of their name!

"I want every DU'er to use 'Xtian' instead of Christian..."

Seems like you are asking for it...

but it doesnt really bother me.

Everytime I see the word in the title of a thread my first thought is to assume its refering to people living in that one region of china that starts with an "X," then my brain translates it and I think "oh right, thats what certain people call Christians."

This goes back to a bunch of things. Many more orthodox communities of all religious stripes say that writing the name of God is verboten. Thus you see some folks writing G-d. Xtian serves the same purpose while not actually WRITING CHRIST. The x is supposed to evoke the Cross, too. Also, especially in early written form, Xtian saved both scarce paper and ink in letter writing--you see it in the Pilgrim writings, and they sure as hell weren't trying to take Christ out of Christmas, or whatever.

The fundies got ahold of this, after they forgot their history (or HYSTERy!)and claimed, stupidly, that Christ was being x'd out, that the Christ was being taken out of Christmas, etc. The term also became more popular because it SAVED space in type setting--you can put XMAS BLOWOUT SALE on one line, but you'd have to scrap some advertising space if you have to use two lines.

But the fundies have used the perceived, unintended "insult" to incite their minions, and portray themselves as VICTIMS. It gives them a faux rallying point, a bullshit excuse, to claim persecution and express outrage. If they were so confident in their religion, they wouldn't have so much need to SCOLD others.

The advertisers have pretty much drifted away from controversy by going with HOLIDAY SUPER SALE and avoiding the issue altogether.

I never did before, but because of all the fundie fake outrage, I now tend to think of an XTIAN as a fake Christian (sleeve-wearing, judgmental types--like the fundies, actually)...one of those dickheads who focuses on revenge, admonishment, and retribution instead of the social messages of Jesus and redemptive qualities of the Xtian/Christian faith.

names for atheists, agnostics and anyone who doesn't share its views. It goes straight to outright hatespeech: Godless, sinners, hellbound, soulless, Satan-worshippers etc.

Incidentally, the religious right is neither.

and at first I thought it was a Chinese name, i.e. Xian Province. LOL I still have to stop and remember what it actually means.

Yes, I am a Christian (Episcopalian- no fundies here) and it doesn't bother me, it just looks like a lazy way of writing Christian.:shrug: