Westboro Church Group.

[Andara Bledin]

By declaring that some may be offended "despite its origins", maybe they should try a little understanding toward the roots of that term instead of objecting to it regardless.

By that defense, we shouldn't frown on the use of other terms that were once harmless and even more correct that are now viewed as unacceptable. And, yet, we know this to not be the case.

If you honestly want to be accurate, it should be written as Xian, since the 't' is redundant.

If you just want to be offensive with plausible deniability, however, either one works just as well.

^-.-^

[Skunkle]

The reason this was asked is that some people who use the spelling "Xtian" do so as a way of reminding others that they consider the Christian thing to be utter nonsense. A friend of mine who's gay does this, because of the extreme prejudice he's received over the years about his orientation. At the same time, the 'X' - as in "Xtian" and "Xmas" - is scientifically designated as the stand-in symbol for the unknown, and it has been pounced on as one of the signs of the "war against God" that some Christians - who, to a degree, I lump in with conspiracy theorists on this one - insist is being waged. Usually this comes up as the "war on Christmas".**

I don't believe science and faith necessarily contradict each other. For example, I believe there stands a good chance that evolution is very real AND God-created - He knew the world would change with time, and created creatures that would respond to it.

Ipecac, what questions do you ask Christians that they can't answer? "Where is your proof that God exists?" is one I can think of, and I have no tangible proof but, as stated above, that's what faith IS - a strong belief in something you cannot see, touch or handle and thus cannot prove with concrete evidence is there. And I don't think that's a bad thing, nor does it negate taking comfort in tangible things at the same time, our world and what we have around us that makes it livable while we're here. If the question is, "What will happen to you when you die?", my answer is, "I don't know. I have some ideas, but I won't know until it happens". I can only guess the reason they might defensive is that it is often put "Where is your proof that God exists?", with the onus on them to prove it visibly or else the asker will be certain that He doesn't exist - it's usually put to mean "If you can't prove He exists, He obviously doesn't, so you've just proved to me that your faith is bullshit. Cut that crap out and get real like me."

**The "war on Christmas" has been happening - and NOT happening - for a long time. Both sides think the other is moving against them. Bosses tell their employees to say "Happy Holidays" because they're afraid that non-Christians will be offended if you say "Merry Christmas". Usually, I see more outrage over "Happy Holidays" being un-Christian than I do about "Merry Christmas" being biased, and yet it goes on. It's very strange and very silly, and I try to stay out of the fray. But I do say "Merry Christmas" because I celebrate Christmas and because it's the holiday most often displayed in places where I'm likely to have reason to say anything of that sort.

[Rapscallion]

I can only guess the reason they might defensive is that it is often put "Where is your proof that God exists?", with the onus on them to prove it visibly or else the asker will be certain that He doesn't exist - it's usually put to mean "If you can't prove He exists, He obviously doesn't, so you've just proved to me that your faith is bullshit. Cut that crap out and get real like me."

Um, I don't know how to put this, but if a christian were able to actually prove the existence of your god, there'd be many more believers. As far as I'm concerned, nothing presented by any believer amounts to more than, "Because I say so."

Know who could persuade me that any god exists? The god him or herself.

Seriously. In the christian faith, we're talking about a being that apparently was able to appear in the form of a burning bush, manifest himself in human form as his own son and come back to life again after being killed, heal the sick, bring the world into existence, feed thousands on two occasions... The list of claims for that god are long and documented.

Right now, I'm not seeing any particular miracles from that particular claimed deity. All I see are philosophical arguments and debates over meanings of words, as well as a large number of splinter groups believing different things from the same words.

All done and said, I think what would be the best thing for christianity would be some sort of actual proof - sort of a unifying force to sort out the constant bickering between groups. So what if you have faith? That's all well and good for you. Have it if you like. Don't get too offended if people ask you to back your claims up.

Rapscallion

[Skunkle]

I don't get offended, so much as I wonder: Why do I *have* to prove to you that my God exists? I'm not going to tell you that you *need* to believe in my God - that is, in my opinion, not my job. Problem is, many Christians seem to be going on the order that it's their job to convert-by-force.

If NEED to make someone believe in something, I need to show them, proof. If I'm only wanting to believe in it myself, I shouldn't have to prove anything to anyone.

[Ipecac Drano]

By that defense, we shouldn't frown on the use of other terms that were once harmless and even more correct that are now viewed as unacceptable. And, yet, we know this to not be the case.

What's with this "all or nothing" stance?

If you honestly want to be accurate, it should be written as Xian, since the 't' is redundant.

They're both valid. Besides,"Xian" could be mixed up with "Xi'an", the capital of the Shaanxi province.

If you just want to be offensive with plausible deniability, however, either one works just as well.

"Plausible deniability"! It's a tradition that's been around before you and Protestantism. Instead of learning about it, you choose to be offended?

Um, I don't know how to put this, but if a christian were able to actually prove the existence of your god, there'd be many more believers. As far as I'm concerned, nothing presented by any believer amounts to more than, "Because I say so."

If there was something that points to that (or any other) god's existence, I'll be in line for the sacraments.

Know who could persuade me that any god exists? The god him or herself.

I'd even settle for indirect evidence.

All done and said, I think what would be the best thing for christianity would be some sort of actual proof - sort of a unifying force to sort out the constant bickering between groups. So what if you have faith? That's all well and good for you. Have it if you like. Don't get too offended if people ask you to back your claims up.

Amen.

[Skunkle]

Any indirect evidence I can claim, someone else can claim has another cause, like simply mind-over-matter or personal will. A few years ago, I had a splitting toothache; I was having it fixed in a week or two, but at the time it had gotten so bad that over-the-counter pain meds had zero effect. I kept wishing it'd go away long enough for me to concentrate on one thing or another, but it kept going nonstop. One day, I was at a friend's house, and he had some very peaceful music I wanted to enjoy. Having exhausted anything else I could think of (besides prescription meds, and those tend to screw with me) I sat down for a moment and prayed that God would give me a short respite from it so I could do just one relaxing thing. And the pain vanished, in about ten seconds - and stayed gone until I woke up the next day.

I call that a good bit of evidence for ME. I know it won't convince non-believers of a thing; one can easily say it's mind-over-matter, but I counter that it stayed gone all day and I even remembered I had a bad tooth that should be hurting. Normally, if I get extremely distracted and I'm feeling under the weather (but I'm not in extreme pain) I can occasionally lose sight of the icky feeling while I'm concentrating, but the moment I pause, it rushes back; I don't think something even worse would just say gone even when I AM thinking about it. But, as said, not only is it easy to disbelieve, but a few hardcore non-believers will go out of their way to look for mundane explanations because they're determined to keep not believing. This isn't the only thing that's happened to me that gave my faith a little spark, but it's one I can explain easily.

Me, I don't really care if people don't believe; I do, and it's not my place to preach to anyone else. I figure if someone else wants to go to God, they will; I'm not here to push them at Him, nor am I here to push Him at them.

[Ipecac Drano]

Any indirect evidence I can claim, someone else can claim has another cause, like simply mind-over-matter or personal will.

Maybe, but like most skeptics, I tend to test the other explanation as well.

A few years ago, I had a splitting toothache; I was having it fixed in a week or two, but at the time it had gotten so bad that over-the-counter pain meds had zero effect. I kept wishing it'd go away long enough for me to concentrate on one thing or another, but it kept going nonstop. One day, I was at a friend's house, and he had some very peaceful music I wanted to enjoy. Having exhausted anything else I could think of (besides prescription meds, and those tend to screw with me) I sat down for a moment and prayed that God would give me a short respite from it so I could do just one relaxing thing. And the pain vanished, in about ten seconds - and stayed gone until I woke up the next day.

I call that a good bit of evidence for ME. I know it won't convince non-believers of a thing; one can easily say it's mind-over-matter, but I counter that it stayed gone all day and I even remembered I had a bad tooth that should be hurting. Normally, if I get extremely distracted and I'm feeling under the weather (but I'm not in extreme pain) I can occasionally lose sight of the icky feeling while I'm concentrating, but the moment I pause, it rushes back; I don't think something even worse would just say gone even when I AM thinking about it. But, as said, not only is it easy to disbelieve, but a few hardcore non-believers will go out of their way to look for mundane explanations because they're determined to keep not believing. This isn't the only thing that's happened to me that gave my faith a little spark, but it's one I can explain easily.

Which begs the question: how do you know that you should have put faith in God rather than in something that's just naturally psychosomatic? You didn't test it.

[Skunkle]

I didn't know. But I have no real way to test it. As stated, no matter what evidence I can claim in my favor, unless it shows someone concrete evidence they can touch and look at, it can be claimed to have other causes.

As stated: I cannot prove beyond all doubt that God exists. But I don't think I have to if I'm not pushing anyone else to believe. See what I'm saying? I don't have to prove it to anyone unless I'm trying to convert them, and I don't try to convert anyone.

[the_std]

They're both valid. Besides,"Xian" could be mixed up with "Xi'an", the capital of the Shaanxi province.

Really? This debate has devolved this far? The removal of one letter from that word means that, in a sub-forum marked "Religion", in a debate that is primarily about Christians, someone will read the word "Xian" and immediately think, "Oh, you mean a town in China with a population of two million people died for our sins on a cross? This all makes so much more sense!"

The majority of this debate has turned to head-bashing-on-rocks anyways, but this just takes the cake.

[protege]

Apologies, protege. That post I made was in NO way directed at you. Sorry if you took it the wrong way. I was just in a foul mood when I wrote that, and I could have worded it better.

Cool. Thoughts don't always come across well in text

Anyway, I can't believe that this thread is still going on!

[Andara Bledin]

Instead of learning about it, you choose to be offended?

I have shown more than enough proof in this thread that I know the historical reasons for the use of that spelling and given no indication at any point that it actually bothers me.

I would suggest you apply a bit more scientific theory to your debate skills, because your hypothesis has no basis.

^-.-^

[Skunkle]

Enough arguing about terms, please. The only reason I see that anyone gets offended over the "x" spelling is because some extremely vocal anti-Christians use this spelling as a rather stupid attempt at offending religious types.

Anyone have further commentary on the Phelps group? What are they picketing now...? Nothing will surprise me with these guys, since their entire idea seems to be that every last single problem in the world - EVERY last one from the smallest issues to killer bombings, tsunamis, earthquakes and wars - are all because of the "increased acceptance" of homosexuality.

...as if we never had deadly wars, tsunamis, earthquakes, and fucked-up murders and killing in the past. The world was oh-so-rosy all the time back when, even in America, you could be thrown in prison, put into an institution or worse if the public found out you were gay, wasn't it? So, back when pretty much 99% of the world condemned homosexuality as vile, unnatural and worthy of serious punishment, what was to blame for all the tragedies back then? Some tiny pockets or schisms of people somewhere in the world got together with their boyfriends or lovers and had tea and played billiards once a week and discussed the latest fashions, and because of this God had mines collapse, ships sink, wars rage and children starve, just to teach those little groups existing somewhere a big ol' lesson?

Really, though, I'm sure Phelps would never answer this question. No one could get close enough to him to ask it.

[Gravekeeper]

...as if we never had deadly wars, tsunamis, earthquakes, and fucked-up murders and killing in the past.

I don't think logic has at any point ever factored into any decision made in the Phelp's household. I'm pretty sure even breakfast cereal is selected based on any percieved homosexuality.

You watch, Tucan Sam is next on the hit list.

[Ipecac Drano]

Really? This debate has devolved this far?

Only by your hand. I had put a little winking smiley after that bit just to show some levity. Don't be so pendantic.

I have shown more than enough proof in this thread that I know the historical reasons for the use of that spelling and given no indication at any point that it actually bothers me.

Clicky
No, you didn't say that it had offended you, but you really felt that you had to say something about it.

I would suggest you apply a bit more scientific theory to your debate skills, because your hypothesis has no basis.

That makes no sense.

[Skunkle]

Gravekeeper, I can't say it on CS but you're awesome, in so many ways. If there's one thing I *wouldn't* wish on the fine people of Nunavut, it's this guy.

Froot Loops? Gotta count Lucky Charms, too; a lucky charm is a tool of the devil, and besides, there are rainbows in them! Don't you know what rainbows mean??

I do wonder what these guys eat; I can't think of much they couldn't find some fault with!

Ipecac, maybe we can swing the topic back around to the Westboro peeps?