Another Name for Christians .......

[doublethink]

those of us who really read our bibles and take into account what Jesus actually said and did? Any ideas? I'm done calling myself Christian because I end up cussing at "right wing christians" with their 'holier than thou attitude'. Jesus never called himself Christian, I believe Paul was the one that coined that name. Discuss & Peace. :)

[Serenades]

1. Hmmmmm

Humanitarians?

[SPKrazy]

2. Jesus Didn't Call Himself A Christian

I don't know who coined the name, but what is wrong with it?

I'm going to continue to call myself a Christian, and those fundies can find something else to call themselves, like Pharisees!

or Dominionists

or fucking dirtbag zealots!

[doublethink]

6. No we have to change it ........

sorry ...... they have the market on the name. Took them a lot of work and deceit to do it, but reality says they got it. So we gotta come up with something different .... maybe something encompassing the name with something else, dealing with the truth. Peace. :)

[ClassWarrior]

3. Progressives?

16+5=2006

NGU.

[SharonAnn]

4. "Red Letter" Christians. Following the words of Christ in the Bible.

The words of Jesus are printed in red letters to differentiate them from the words of others.

These are the actual teachings of Christ.

[doublethink]

10. True but that discounts other things in that book RW Christians ....

twist, spin ..... and otherwise ignore .... sigh, okay, it was just a thought. Peace. :)

[roguevalley]

5. peacemaker sons/daughters of the Prince of Peace

[doublethink]

7. Can you make that into one word? n/t

[Democrats_win]

8. Didn't the disciples call themselves "The Way?"

[salvorhardin]

9. A sincere suggestion from an atheist

Reclaim Christianity, both in spirit and title. Don't let the fundie nuts pervert your faith by usurping its name. We computer geeks were able to turn a perjorative into a neutral descriptor. Surely you can reclaim the good name of Christianity, especially when Europe, Russia, and South America still view the religion the same way you do. But... it's going to require being agressive and controversial, and speaking out loudly against the fundie nuts in the streets and in the pews. Remember, they're only about 4 million strong. There's roughly 196 million of you.

Just this atheist's view, and I sincerely intend this as friendly advice. I hope I haven't offended.

[mom cat]

11. God bless you for that suggestion! No offence intended. I am just punchy

right now!
Seriously, I think that you have a good point. Perhaps calling themselves peace loving Christians would be a good start.

[salvorhardin]

13. Naw, none taken.

I recognize the spirit in which "God Bless you" is said even if I don't believe.

By the way, you might want to check this group out... I don't know very much about them but they seem to be in line with your ideas: Christian Alliance For Progress
http://www.onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_68.shtml

[mom cat]

18. That looks like a good site. Actually the God Bless You was a little

thing I picked up from Madalyn Murry O'Hare. Many years ago I was president of the Religious Groups Council at the University of Houston. We invited OHare to speak to our group. Well, even the klan showed up with their white sheets fresh from the cleaners. At the ens of the evening she thanled us by saying "God bless you!". I an just returning the sentiment to another athiest. I have always found that athiests made better Christians than most Christians. Peace.

[salvorhardin]

38. Cool

Madelyn Murray O'Hare -- such an old firebrand. Sad that she's gone. I guess that's what we have Richard Dawkins for now. :-) Peace, and as I said below, if liberal Christians stand with us atheists, we will stand with you.

[salvorhardin]

39. Christian Alliance For Progress

I see my link above isn't working now for some reason, so here's a link to the Google cache of that article: http://tinyurl.com/pyy5g

And a link to the Christian Allliance For Progress site: http://www.christianalliance.org/site/c.bnKIIQNtEoG/b.593863/k.D6BE/Issues.htm

Our positions on political issues arise from how we see the values that Jesus taught. To learn more about these values, click here. To download a PDF of the issues below, click here.

Caring For "The Least Of These" - Pursuing Economic Justice
The Jesus of the Gospels calls us to good stewardship, justice, and care for "the least of these." We call on our nation's leaders to seek economic justice in the management of our nation's wealth.

Caring for the Earth - Responsible Environmental Stewardship for Today
Jesus urged his followers to be good stewards and to act for good in the world here and now. We respond by caring for God's created world today, holding our environment in trust for our children.

Rejecting Bigotry, Embracing Dignity - Equality for Gays and Lesbians
Jesus taught equality, justice and obligation. We accept Jesus' call to love one another and to welcome all God's children at the table.

Honoring the Sanctity Of Childbearing Decisions
Effective Prevention vs. Criminalizing Abortion
Jesus taught compassion, responsibility, and equality. Following his call, we support responsible, compassionate programs that are genuinely effective in helping prevent unintended pregnancy. We affirm that each woman's body belongs to herself. No woman should be forced either to bear a child or to terminate a pregnancy.

Forsaking Brute Power - Seeking Peace, Not War
Jesus knew power and he knew it could be used for justice or for conquest. Over and over, Jesus blessed his followers with peace and urged them to peace. Following his example, we call for restraint - not aggression - in the exercise of our nation's power.

Extending Healing to All - Health Care for All Americans
Jesus' insisted on justice, equality, and care for "the least of these." Acting on his teachings, we claim every American must have access to excellent health care.

[NuttyFluffers]

14. Disciples of the Prince of Peace?

i, too, recommend reclaiming any honor left in that label (there's been many acts of horror done under its guise, but not every act done under its name was horror). oftentimes the most crucial fight is the one within. it's time for the real christians to do a little house cleaning of its selfish and self-serving usurpers.

[Midnight Rambler]

20. How about just Disciples?

Puts you in company with the original followers. And implies you're following the words of Jesus, not the church's dogma.

[doublethink]

12. Taken no offense whatsoever from you ......

In fact .... I hope you believe me when I say some of my best friends in life have been and are Atheists. I'll PM you with names if you want me too and you can follow up. :) ... You guys always make so much 'sense' it's scary, but you'll never pull me away from my faith (lol) but that's another story...... anyway, no we have to change the name. Ever since the name Christianity came into being it has been used to divide, conquer, politicize, and subdue. Enough. New name needed. Now. Peace. :)

[salvorhardin]

28. Thanks

BTW: Very few atheists would ever try to turn you from your faith. We might analyze the piss out of it, and some of us will make very strong criticism of religion in general (ala Dawkins, Harris and myself) but we all have friends, loved ones and associates who believe. All we ask is that when the fundies come after our rights, or try to blur (dismantle is more like it these days) the separation between church and state that protects both believer and nonbeliever that you stand with us and we'll stand with you.

I'd still like you to reclaim the name Christianity but if you think a new name is in order then power to you.

[TreasonousBastard]

19. You're absolutely right...

There are well over a billion "Christians" of various sorts around the world, and a few gasbags can't usurp or claim our religion. For 2,000 years we've watched as various groups and individuals have tried to take the teachings of the Bible and pervert them, but the real teachings haven't been destroyed yet and we don't expect them to be any time in the near future.

Tent revivals with their fire&brimstone preachers have been a fixture of the US since the country started. We've had several Great Awakenings, and in modern times this is almost entirely an American phenomenon, at least as far as Christians are concerned. Have Aimee Semple McPherson and Father Coughlin been forgotten already. Reverend Ike?

But, we've survived past religious silliness, and we will undoubtedly survive this round of it. The fanatics and nutcases will burn themselves out just as they have in the past-- their rhetoric ultimately fails when reality bites.

[salvorhardin]

34. McPherson and Coughlin are both ideological children of Billy Sunday

But the liberal, intellectual side of Christianity won out for a while, maybe 40 years, until the far right nutcases enabled their fundamentalist religious nutcase cousins (Falwell, Robertson, etc.). And yet at the same time Robert Schuller built as large a following as the Falwells and Robertsons combined by preaching an optmistic message of peace and love. It might be hard to displace the usurpers, especially since their apocalyptic message resonates with the people during times of economic hardship, but frankly I think you guys have the better message.

Oh, if you (or anyone else) want an excellent overview of the history of evangelical Christianity in the U.S., read the first section of Richard Hofstadter's Anti-Intellectualism In American Life. It's very dry and dense (and copiously footnoted) but will give you an amazing perspective on where the religious right came from.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0394703170

[slide to the left]

63. no joke

The rest of the world's Christianity is way different.

[kiki]

32. Yup.

YOU don't change your name.

You make THEM change THEIR name.

[pocket]

15. Sheep

Jesus did refer to this, his flock of sheep, and it certainly fits.

[Warpy]

16. Call them Calvinists, because that's what they are.

They've eliminated Jesus Christ (except for the theft of his name) and replaced him with equal measures of Paul and Calvin. They believe the rich were destined to be rich and thus are favored by god and can do no wrong. They believe faith alone will punch their ticket to heaven, no matter what damage they do to us here on earth. They believe the poor were cursed by god and that's why they are poor and deserve nothing but scorn. The believe in Armageddon and think they are powerful enough to force god's hand and make it happen on their own time.

Call them anything else you like, but don't call them Christians. That is the last thing they are.

[DoYouEverWonder]

17. I call them Pauline Christians

because they are followers of Paul of Tarsus, not Jesus of Nazareth.

[doublethink]

23. Arrrrrrrrggggggg......

what they are is 'Christians' ..... and I want no part of it! They win, they got the name, however deceitful, dishonest, and self serving that name encompasses. We need to drop it. Come up with something else which Jesus had no part of. I'm done. I really am. I've destroyed 14 bibles over 23 years .... and I can't call myself 'Christian' in what humanity wants to carry forward in that name anymore ..... in whatever form the popular $ guise can afford in our world. I'm done. Let them have the name. I want another, which is based on 'Ho every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money, come ye, buy, and eat: yea, come buy wine and milk without money and with out price. Wherefore do ye spend money for that which is not bread? and you labor for that which satisfieth not? hearken diligently unto me, and eat ye that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in fatness ....... Isaiah 55: 1-2. Peace. :) Need a new name....... yes we do .......

[Critters2]

42. Calvin never taught such things

I know..I really AM a Calvinist, and a progressive Christian, and a Democrat. Calvin taught very strongly that Christians are OBLIGATED to care for the poor. He turned Geneva into a refugee site during the religious wars of his time, and opened hospitals (more like refugee centers than medical facilities) to care for them. He allowed women more responsibility and opportunity than any religious leader of his day. He taught that, while grace may gain one salvation, a Christian is obligated to live an ethical life, following the teachings of Jesus, as an expression of gratitude for the grace God has given. Calvin would have considered mistreatment of the poor--not poverty itself--a sign of reprobation.

Some of the most progressive Christian denominations, including mine, the United Church of Christ, have their roots in the Genevan reform.

You've obviously been reading Max Weber's misinformed interpretation of Calvin. I really wish universities would stop assigning that asshole to first year sociology students. Or at least make 'em read Calvin first. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Critters
proud progressive Reformed Christian

[salvorhardin]

45. Calvinism got all tangled up in Social Darwinism in the U.S.

It's been about 20 years since I read Weber, and even then I was a comp. sci. and cog. psych. student. Can you point me to specifically where you feel Weber went wrong? I'd like to revisit his stuff.

[Critters2]

58. Don't have much time now

but Weber didn't actually analyze Calvin as much as he did later manifestations of the Reformed tradition. These had moved away from Calvin's basic teachings by the time they became the groups Weber studied. Weber was a sociologist, not a theologian. He drew conclusions about the theologies of groups based upon their social behaviors. For instance, he assumed that, because Reformed Christians were economically more successful (and they were) than their Roman Catholic neighbors, they were driven to economic success by their theology. In reality, there were probably a number of factors that motivated them. Indeed, it's possible that Weber's conclusion is the opposite of the apporpriate one--maybe people who were driven were attracted to Reformed theology, rather than people who were first Reformed being pushed by their religion to be economically successful.

But I'm tired. I'm always wiped on Sunday afternoons. Just took a "for fun" online IQ test, which scored me at 126, lower than any official test. I shouldn't do such things on Sunday pm. How the hell do I know which box should completes the freakin' set???!!!

Sorry, I digress.

[salvorhardin]

59. Those early sociologists are like the early psychologists

A lot of their work is based on assumptions that rose out of their own social culture and Weber is no exception. But it was the birth of a brand new discipline and much of their work is foundational so it's important to understand people like Weber even today, just like psychology students still study Freud. But you're right that textbooks don't put people like Weber into context.

FWIW: I think there's a lot of implicit racism in Weber's work even if Weber himself wasn't overtly racist. For instance, his ideas that only Protestantism could lead to a work ethic (c.f. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism).

How do you feel about Émile Durkheim? A lot of my own views on religion are informed by functionalism even as I understand its' limitations. Actually my ideas are probably more in the vein of the neofunctionalists.

[Critters2]

60. I think Durkheim did better work than Weber

He seems to understand the human condition better.

When I was in college--a budding existentialist, like all French majors--I used to refer to myself as "majoring in angst with a minor in anomie".

So, I resonate with Durkheim...or he resonates with me.

[Hubert Flottz]

21. Dog Killers!

Google Reverend C C Baird! Or check this out...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x563529

[ChristianLibrul]

22. We are Christians

We are Christians, they are theofascists, Old Testament
christians, liars, bullies, abominations out to turn our
country into a feudal theocracy.  Call yourself what you are,
and them what they are.

[Igel]

37. "Old Testament Xian" is taken, sorry.

Some of them call themselves Judaizing Xians. Others, "

They view themselves as living as Jesus would have lived, and by his words. They follow the lord of the sabbath, for example, and consider it strange that Jesus may be lord of the sabbath, but people go to church on Sunday. They note that when Jesus was rebuking the Pharisees and pointed out how scrupulously they tithe their herbs, he never said they shouldn't--in fact, he said they should do precisely that, but they should pay attention to the weightier matters ... of the law.

They're also pacifists.

They wouldn't consider most of the people here to be Xian at all.

[doublethink]

36. Woof ...... woof !

:rofl:

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

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

[salvorhardin]

30. That's not called for

You have two of the most hard-core, in-your-face atheists peacefully interacting with liberal Christians in this thread and then you insult the believers. Please take it somewhere else.

[beam me up scottie]

31. Get a grip.

Poser.

[upi402]

thank you for this. i''m not religious but would love to once again

respect an individual's decision to worship as that person wishes -or not worship.

lately though, i'm just fed up! saturated! no pity for zealots, especially the ones that seek to control governments and diminish freedom and liberty.

[FreedomAngel82]

25. Randi once said

Fristians. ;) But yes Jesus never wanted to be called rabbi or anything like that. He didn't call his followers Christians. The word Christian means to be Christ-like. So that's where it comes from.

[beam me up scottie]

26. I call their kind

fundies and the Amerikkkan Talibornagain, perhaps you could come up with a new nickname for them for us to use on DU.

We have so much fun renaming Little Lord Pissypants, make it a competition to rename THEM, not you.

[doublethink]

33. They have it 'Christians' ...... and I don't want it anymore ....

no re-namining or competition required. :) ....... I want another name based on caring, love, affection, love thy neighbor as thyself, for our fellow human being, and eventually ...... truth .... if that's possible. :) But the first part of the concept I'm sure you won't argue with, then maybe without bombs drooping and people getting killed over it, we could discuss it? Priority's you know? Peace. ;) .....

[beam me up scottie]

35. What are you asking?

If I think renaming will work?

I doubt it will succeed.


The Brights tried it and most of us won't have anything to do with them because the name itself is condescending.


I prefer to own and be proud of my atheism.

[doublethink]

40. You own it ....... Atheism ........

and I personally cannot conjur up anything really negatively toward that word when it comes to 'history' and it's relationships with mankind (or womankind)... as opposed to 'Christianity' ....... geesh ....... 'The brights' sorry ...... guess I have to look into that, or them? Excuse my ignorance on that subject. Peace.

[beam me up scottie]

41. No problem!

The Brights decided that atheism had too many negative connotations and thought their new name was a good idea.

Too bad they forgot how contrary atheists tend to be!

We held our noses and told them "Un uh."

I refuse to let the reich wing redefine atheism, liberalism and feminism.

I'm proud to be all of those things, and you should be proud to be a christian.

[Dinger]

27. I Recommend "Joshua In A Troubled World" by Joseph Girzone

I know this doesn't really answer your question, but I read it not too long ago, and I like how there are characters in the story that remind me of the * "admin." and they are made to look evil and foolish. I remember one part about the attorney general ("asscroft") really looking like an idiot asshole. I don't want to say more, I don't want to spoil it.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0385511825/104-9428794-7290304?v=glance&n=283155

[BlackVelvet04]

29. In New York at one time,

the mafia called some of the Christians who did street ministry "The Lights".

[Critters2]

43. I have parishioners with this attitude

but I insist we keep calling ourselves Christian. I REFUSE to hand my faith over to them! I am a Trinitarian Reformed Progressive Christian. I claim all of those titles, and I will not surrender them! If they want to claim any of these names, they'll have to live alongside me...and my glbt parishioners, and my politically progressive parishioners, and my vegan parishioners, and all of us.

Because we're Christian too!!

[doublethink]

47. Oh boy .......

good for you ..... but don't you think for history's sake we couldn't keep it a bit more simple, for the meek, the poor, the salt of the earth and so on ..... couldn't we come up with something a bit more ..... 'meek' ? .... Just asking? :shrug: Come on .... what person off the street is going to understand your title of 'Trinitarian Reformed Progressive Christian' ...... really? Not trying to .... well yea I am ... what are you talking about? In all honesty, faith, love, and truth, lay off the spin. Keep it simple ..... but keep it real. But God Bless for sure. :) .....

[doublethink]

44. How can you call someone Christian ...

who, or whom is so pissed off at the 'right wing perspective' or interpretation of 'things' that it makes them CUSS, because it is so OBVIOUS THEY are not dealing with sound biblical doctrine? Hmmmmmmmmmm? When you ask yourself day after day ..... wtf ... are they talking about or coming from? .... hmmmmmmmmmm ? And you know just calling yourself Christian now-a-days ..... will put you in they're population? Wrong! Not gonna do it! Need a new name! :) ....... Peace.

[beam me up scottie]

46. Isn't that exactly what

the Americans on DU do every day?

Take back the name, take back our country.

[doublethink]

48. Yes. sigh ........

:hug:

[beam me up scottie]

49. You're okay, doublethink.

Only truly awesome people agonize over issues like this.

As you can see, you've got lots of company on DU.

[doublethink]

50. And that's another thing .... :) .......

I'm also about ready to get on board the 'secede from the union train' and get all my fellow DU'ers out to California and start our own Country ....... but hey that may take a bit more effort. Just a thought. :)

[beam me up scottie]

51. My home state,

Vermont (oh how I miss it, I've got to go home) is already discussing the possibility.

If anyone does it, it'll be Dean's old stomping ground! :P

[doublethink]

53. I'll fight for you Beam Me Up....and Vermont! I really will, ......

let me know ..... I'm there. Gotta get some sleep now though, goodnight my friend. :hug: Mar. :)

[davidinalameda]

65. Vermont doesn't have a beach

sorry, can't live there

:)

[varkam]

52. What does it matter?

What does it matter what you call yourself? Seems to me that if you're a follower of Christ then not calling yourself a Christian would be disingenuous. Just because you don't like what other members of your faith are doing (e.g. gay-bashing, bible thumping, women subjugating...) doesn't mean you can say "Well, they're not Christians".

It would be like right-wingers saying "All these liberals are calling themselves Americans! We need to think of another name for ourselves!". We're all Americans, and likewise, followers of Christ are all Christians. If you really want to separate yourself from the hacks that use religion to further their own hatred, then do it through your actions, not semantics.

[beam me up scottie]

54. Easy there,

I think the op needed a good old-fashioned DU rant.

Boy do I ever know how that feels.

[slide to the left]

64. I don't

want to say they are not Christians, I want to say that I don't believe what they believe.

[muriel_volestrangler]

55. I was going to suggest 'Disciples of Love'

but then I decided it sounded like a Barry White song :-)

Slightly more seriously, how about 'Agapists', since unselfish, universal love is the basis of life for you?

[salvorhardin]

57. I think you have a winner there

And the term is already "out there" so liberal Christians wouldn't need to both define a new word and work on its' accepted meaning.

Timothy Jackson, of the University of Notre Dame, calls the kind of thinker whose moral view he endorses "the strong agapist." The reference is to Harold Bloom's "strong poet" (see Richard Rorty, Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity <1989>), a thinker who is anxious to be the creator of his own world and very uneasy about being Anybody Else's creation. One can hardly imagine a character more different from a strong agapist, but presumably both are "strong." Strong poets aim to hold up, unsupported, the world they create; strong agapists accept a norm given them by Jesus Christ ("Love one another as I have loved you"), but they do so without the support of much personal consolation.

According to strong agapism, agape is a "metavalue" uniquely above all other values, such as self-realization, happiness, and justice, yet it does not invalidate the other values. It is not the sole good but it is the greatest good, so it is never right to transgress love for the sake of justice, self-realization, or happiness. Such other values must be interpreted in terms of love, and as unrealizable apart from love. For example, to be truly self-realized is to be sacrificially loving; and "justice" without love evolves into injustice. The final biblical form of the commandment to love is not "You shall love your neighbor as yourself," but "Love one another as I have loved you" (John 15:12). Thus the sacrificial atoning love displayed in the cross of Jesus is the model. Other loves, such as eros and philia, even friendship with God, depend "on agape for their genesis and ordered continuance. If we are not loved agapically first, and if we do not, in turn, first love others agapically, then our efforts to love erotically or philially will either never emerge or degenerate once they do."
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3664/is_200101/ai_n8936483

I guess most atheists would be strong poets in contrast but I think the term 'agapist' could be used by some of us too (minus the belief in Jesus Christ as the son of god part) since it is being used as a metavalue. Which is kind of nice since it would hint toward values shared by all humanity rather than just Christians. But I think liberal Christians should still keep the name Christianity, rather modify it with your most important value. Agapist Christianity.

[Lucy - Claire]

56. Follower of Christ.......

A disiple of Jesus.....

[manic expression]

61. Galileans? n/t

[slide to the left]

62. I stopped calling myself a Christian

a while ago.

When someone outright asks, I explain that I am a "progressive Christian" and refer them to the website.

I agree with "the way" and also firmly believe that we need a new name.

I like Peacemakers, "follewers of the Way" and "progressive Christian." We do need to distinguish ourselves from fundies and let people know we are out there and thriving.

I went to a Conservative Baptist university and felt really alone at times, the I heard Jim Wallace speak and heard others cheer and realized we are just disconnected, not alone.

[Goldensilence]

66. the way is taken

ask the Taoists.