GunnerJ

Well, good then. Just to make it explicit, though, what I was hinting at was the possibity that some of the 15% who claim they have no religion could be Christians... and inadvertantly supporting secular causes. Oh well, I hope their little cliche is worth it.

Peter Edward Faulkner

Given the definitions of religion:

re·li·gion (ri lij'uhn) n.

1 belief in or worship of God or gods.

2 a particular system of religious belief and worship: the Christian religion, the Moslem religion.

3 a matter of conscience: She makes a religion of keeping her house neat.


[ L religio , -onis respect for what is sacred, probably originally, care (for worship and traditions) < relegere go through again re- again + legere read]

________________________________________
The Canadian Encyclopedia Plus, copyright © 1995 by McClelland & Stewart Inc.
Gage Canadian Dictionary. Copyright © 1983 by Gage Educational Publishing Company.
_________________________________________

I doubt it is possible for a christian to have zero religion.


And given His perspective on religion:

James 1:27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, [and] to keep himself unspotted from the world.


supporting secular causes isn't going to happen as part of pure religion.

Kosh

Well, they sure as hell couldn't claim "head of household" !!!!!!!!!!!!

Perchance

I've had this line piled on me several times before. I don't really understand why they think it'll work, or that it's new. After all, even if you switch the terminology, what's to prevent other religions from doing the exact same thing?

"I have a relationship with Kali."

I can imagine a Christian objecting to that. I can also imagine a Christian not understanding why "I have a relationship with Jesus" isn't any different.

It scares me, the things I can imagine sometimes .

-Perchance.

I ate Pascal's Wafer

LOL, that's one thing I didn't think about. Y'know, you're quite right I think. Of course this would suggest that there are fewer non-believers than we thought, but at least we seem bigger on paper!

Now, all we have to do is let them keep thinking this until we eventually become a majority in the country and can start demanding our own laws.

-Nick

Starboy

Could this tactic by Christians to dodge the association with "religion" be just another trick in a long line of deceits to confuse the stupid?

Would a religion by any other name be as irrational?

Starboy

I ate Pascal's Wafer

Hehe, I think it really is. On the xian board I mentioned there were a few bright xians who were trying to tell the other exactly where they went wrong, why xianity IS a religion, and why religions aren't intrinsically bad. The defenders of xianity not being a religion had no substantial argument in defense of their assertion. They kept mumbling the same stuff over and over without really considering what everyone else was telling them.

You just might be on to something there. Now we can know when to avoid debates with certain xians. If they agree that xianity is a religion, they're fine. If they assert than xianity is a relationship, not a religion, then we can be content in knowing that a debate with them is an exercise in futility and we would be more productive to start a pocket lint removal service for a drycleaning company.

-Nick

Egoinos

I find the "relationship not religion" mantra nauseating to say the least. What makes it particularly irritating is that it is demonstratably false, whether you use a dictionary definition, or the Bible, both of which tend to concur that <a href="http://www.geocities.com/atheistdivine/religion.html" target="_blank">Christianity is indeed a religion.</a>

Seems to be a modern fashion to me Don't know why they bother to be honest.

lpetrich

That's essentially bragging that one is irreligious. Which would be a good way to make fun of such characters. But one that would only work on those who consider "religion" a Good Thing.

I wonder what will be next for these characters. I've seen apologists brag about how rare miracles supposedly are, as if they are trying to co-opt the idea of natural law. And how the Bible describes the Big Bang. And how super-feminist the Bible supposedly is.

Will the next thing they tell us is that the Bible had clearly described evolution and that Charles Darwin was only rediscovering what the Bible had stated long ago?

I ate Pascal's Wafer

LMAO!!!

They're still in the dark ages right now, so perhaps in another few hundred years when they make their way up to these ages they'll say the Bible clearly described evolution. It really wouldn't surprise me if they did just that.

-Nick