I wish we didn't have to call them something. I wish we'd just feed them to fucking lions.

I just came up with a fun name for the crazy, psycho followers: uberChristians. Calls to mind Nazis, n'cest pas?

"Son Lovers" is appealingly subversive, but not helpful in this case, I think.

There was only ever one Christian, and they nailed him to a cross.

@4

Exactly.

poe et al
y'all can definetly nail me, but not to no cross

The only name for anyone who believes in a non existent entity is mental midget.

what about people that believe in christs fundamental message but not the mystical properties of his existence?

8: I call those people "me."

I generally call the "good" Christians Christians, and the "bad" ones Hypochristians.

@4 good call. I'm more in favor of Andrew Sullivan's renaming the psychos as "christianists" than having to rename the few decent, mildly delusional believers.

There are already names for the non-idiotic Christians: Jesuits, Franciscans, Trappists, Benedictines, etc. You don't often hear from them because, well, their faith is their own business. What a concept.


Someone needs to get named "Holy Gumby", though. That's just too awesome.

Jesuits? Dude. Get out once in a while.

None of these debates are new. For historical perspective, Mark Twain described them as professing christians vs. practicing christians (of whom he thought there were no more than a small handful. If that.) Highly recommended: Letters to the Earth, Letters to the Devil, and other late works.

None of these debates are new. For historical perspective, Mark Twain described them as professing christians vs. practicing christians (of whom he thought there were no more than a small handful. If that.) Highly recommended: Letters to the Earth, Letters to the Devil, and other late works.

And which group was it that's bending Jesus to fit their own bias? I can't tell the difference.

@4: then how did he win Project Runway?

Fat Belgian Bastards,

or,

let's just call them nothing at all...

The Jesus of the Bible is a myth. Never existed as told and never said the things attributed to him. Those things were written long after he faked his death to escape the Romans. Let's call them "Chrimythigians".

these types have never stopped to read their own holy text. dummies.

Wait, I'm Unitarian and I don't believe the whole Jesus rigamarole. Call 'em something else. Maybe "slightly less batshit".

Vince, The Da Vinci code got to you too huh?

I guess, I'm all for much of the philosophy and teachings of Jesus without the mystism. I think there is much value in the parables, and learning to give good will to your fellow man.

Funny though, most of the hate breeding seems to come from either ... Pauls letters (Paul supposedly was a TOTAL repressed, self hating, homo)
or the Old testament.

But you know, you glance at the Beatitudes (depending on translation), you realize that most of them are all right and they are thought exercises in humility and love.

at least hutcherson et al follow the teachings of the bible. THEY are the true christians!

call 'em "cash & carry drinkmix swilling douchebags" for all I care.

elenchos @13 - Sorry, I meant to say SEXY Jesuits. Better?

@21: Yay, Unitarians! But yes, careful not to lump us all together into one "believe in Jesus" or "don't believe in Jesus" camp. Growing up, I used to get questions all the time from people asking if Unitarian Universalists believed in God or not.

My explanation that even though I didn't believe in God or in Jesus' divinity, there were some Unitarians who did (and Unitarian Wiccans, and Unitarian Buddhists, etc.) never made sense to some people ("but how is it a religion if you don't all believe the same thing?"). Once I started tacking on, "you know, it's kind of like a club" at end of my description, that seemed to satisfy the incredulous. Reductive, but effective.

OR Matt. Never saw or read the "Divinci Code" but I've read and listened to a lot of history. Try it sometime.

I like to call them Lutherans.

Sullivan likes to call the Crazy Christians "Christianists" but I like the term Xtians.

so christians who believe as you feel they should believe are the true believers? isn't this another version of hutcherson? rather than get caught up in who is the 'real' christian, we should try to marginalize those who try to impose their beliefs on others.

I am one of those "enlightened Christians" going to a congregational church that is open and affirming (we accept everyone and have gay members). We like to call ourselves "free-range Christians."

Free-range Christians? Burn in hell.

Thank you Mr. Poe, sir. Please may I have another?

@27

It was a JOKE Vince. I just read the Da Vinci code finally and yes they touch a lot of things such as the texts of Nag Hammadi, the dead sea scrolls (which I admitedly know little about). And there are fun speculations of Jesus travels to Inda, the Beatitudes were a paraphrasing of some of Buddhas teacings. Some stories tell of Jesus learning exorsizms from the Bhramins then telling the lower castes to revolt when he was disgusted with the lifestyle, he fled when he learned of plot of to kill him.

Then there was this really really weird recap of the crusifixion of Christ. It wasn't this major production of a week of exhaulting him with palm fronds before selling him out and demanding Barachus being released. Especially the whole deal Pontious Pilot being on his side. Jesus died in more of a whimper. He was in fact quite popular with the people, and he was crusified by Pilot as to not create a nuisance.

This version somehow seemed to make a lot of sense to me.

Still, the feats of miracles, dying for our sins, son of man ... etc. etc. I don't buy it. But as to what really happened about 2000 years ago, I don't think we'll ever really know.

Oh, gross. It's talking to me.

dammit, poe, be nice, or no more free PBRs from me at the next slog happy hour! i mean it!

What's fun about being rude to nice Christians is you're the one who looks like the idiot, so they're winning, and you're still getting your laughs out of it.

In one of Robert Ludlum's books the premise was that Jesus never died on the cross, that his followers managed to replace him with a substitute. So, when he miraculously rose after 3 days it wasn't really a miracle...And there was this group of religious guys tasked with keeping the documents about this or the grave or something a secret because what if Christians discovered their entire religion was based on a lie?

I confess, despite it being a fictional suspense thriller it made me think.

@34 - "Barachus"? We crucified the son of God and spared Mr. T?

@39 ... yeah I think that's it. I might have to relook that up. but we spared Mr. T.

When I think about sitting through those god aweful masses on Palm Sunday and Easter.

They were boring as all hell, and they STILL creep me out.

If the so called "enlightened" xtians don't already have a name for the other guys, then the difference must not be all that important to them.

@41

Silence is agreement. Always remember.

hukay, a lil clarification, pepples.

it was BARABBAS the crowd called for, not B. Barakas, although picturing him yelling 'shut up fool!' is quite jolly.

it wasn't robert ludlum, it was irving wallace, and the novel was 'the word'.

hi hernandez!

dreamflying ... harshly analagous to "muslum sympathisers"

but really, if you want my honest opinion, religion is MOSTLY about community, family, and tradition and less about "faith". Loosing sight in the eyes of the community is much much more painful than loosing sight with god (probably why there are so many disenfranchised and dare I say bitter people toward "religion" ... who aren't enamored with their community).

That said, issolated communities shelter people from the diversity of the "real" world. While certain people like to push the button to keep things issolated, others like to be welcoming, which is why Islam and Christianity are the two most powerful religions in the world today.

Ok, so I was close.

But I like it better that we spared Barakas over Barrabas. It's been over 15 years since I've been to church maybe?

@43 Well it might have been Irving Wallace, but it was Robert Ludlum too "The Gemini Contenders."

It is my understanding (as someone who was raised fundie) that some conservative Christians do actually call themselves True Christians. So that might not be the best choice. And since Unitarians are an actual group who do not all necessarily identify with Christianity, it also seems like we might want to stay away from that one.

I'm a NPDOC fan.

I voted NPDOC.

"EN-py-dock" has a nice ring to it.

"Evolved" and "enlightened" Christians should simply be referred to as illiterates.

Either that or as worshipers of cognitive dissonance.

Why are some responders seemingly hostile to Christians, yet are up in arms when others are hostile to other groups.

Hostility is itself a manifestation of cognitive dissonance.

Most of the important and well read scholars of both Western and Eastern societies were believers in some form of a higher power, whether it was the Abrahamic God of the Christians Muslims or Jews, or the Hindu pantheon, or the enlightenment Deism that established much of our modern culture (which allowed people like Kurt Lewin, an active Jew, to eventually reason out group dynamics, leading to further understanding of cognitive reasoning and dissonance).

You do realize that for most of history a scholar or writer who didn't say he believed in God would have been ostracized and persecuted, right? Kind of makes it easy to say they all believed in a higher power when your beloved religion was burning the rest at the stake.

A lot of people right here have personally been fucked over by Christians. It has left them feeling hostile. And then this mcFly comes along and wants to lecture everybody but the instigators of the problem about it. Go clean your own house. Beam in your eye, remember?

I think Hutch and his gang wouldn't give you five minutes of their time so instead you hang around here looking for sympathy because you figure it's easier than talking to those assholes. But your religion is why they are such assholes, so stop trying to run from it.

radical christians. i think they'd like that, whichever group got to be the radical group and not the plain group.

I am probably more annoyed or pissed about those idiots who purport to represent the mainline.

And Hutch wouldn't give me 2 minutes of his time, cause I am not going to give him any money.

I am not here to try to tell people they are wrong, that isn't my goal. I'll try to shut up, cause I do see where I am being one sided in my comments.

I is knee jerk reaction to make a point that there are differences, that there are Christians who aren't mindless and hateful fuckwads.

they found my car. i took your advice, elenchos, and bought a club.

@53, Congrats on the car being found and thanks a bunch for the funny, funny write-up about it. I was sitting here, feeling sorry for myself because I was working late on a Friday night and then I read your tale and realized my life could be much, much worse. I could be an inept car thief named Roger.

Re: 51: Thank you, Elenchos.

Also, at the minute I type this (9:37pm Pacific), the number of votes in the poll is a nice round 420.

Smoke a bowl and praise Jesus.

What? Talk of "Unit"arians and no penis jokes? What's Slog coming to these days?

How about collaborators?

mcfly, i hear you, and am sympathetic, and i make the distcinction myself, here and elsewhere. but elenchos makes a good point: you folks do need to start making clear and loud statements in public that distinguish yourselves from the fuckwad xtians. it's them you need to address. that's when you will start having the support of the secular crowd, who will then be more mindful of making the distinction.

This is going to be long, but since this thread seems to have run its course and few people will be reading it anyway, I am not concerned.

My first reaction when reading this thread at approximately 11:30 last night was astonishment at the level of hostility out there. Not hostility toward Ken Hutcherson which would hardly be surprising among the Slog community, but toward Christians and other people of faith in general, even (and especially in some cases) those who do not share Hutch's opinions and are just as repulsed by him as thinking non-religious people. Ken Hutcherson and those who share his bigotry are reviled, and rightly so, because of his statements and actions. But other Christians are reviled in places on this thread simply for being Christians.

Full disclosure: I am a member of a politically progressive, Obama-voting, gay friendly, feed-the-poor church on Capitol Hill. I even sing bass/baritone in the choir. I have lately been asking myself why--why on earth--I continue to attend church weekly when I don't believe in the god (small g intentional) as described in the Bible, doubt that the miraculous events of both Old and New Testaments happened, and don't believe Jesus of Nazareth was any different from the rest of us mortals. Is it because I have friends in the congregation? Is it because of the excellent music program? Is it because attending church is a familiar pattern from the time of my birth that I am reluctant to give up? Probably all of the above and more. Are these "right" reasons for going to church? I honestly have no idea.

I can understand the hostility many of you have toward religion and have no intention of telling anyone that your feelings are invalid. I too have been fucked by religious people. A few of you know my story; if you don't, just take my word for it. But I also share the embarrassment felt by McFly by how Christianity has been given a bad name by Hutch, the late Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, James Dobson et al. as well as those polyester-clad big haired rednecks on those appalling "Christian" cable television networks. And I quite honestly have no clue as to what I can do to take back the good name of Christianity, no small task given its 2000 year history. I try to speak out as much as I can against bigotry, greed and the abominable marriage of much of American Christianity to right wing politics, but few listen. I am at a loss.

The best I can do is to try and live out the teachings of Jesus as best as I can. Whether Jesus actually said and did everything attributed to him in the Bible is completely irrelevant; I can draw inspiration from characters in books that are completely fictional and never claim to be otherwise. Jesus said, among other things, to treat others with respect, forgive people when they wrong you, and help those in need. I think the world would be a better place if everyone did these things, regardless of whether they believe in Jesus as their personal savior, the second person of the holy trinity, whatever, or not. Do I succeed? Absolutely not. There are times when I am a complete asshole. But I try my best. That is all I can do. Is using the teachings of Jesus the only way to become a better person? Absolutely not. Is it for everyone? Absolutely not. But it is the way I have chosen.

These are, like yours, my completely unsolicited thoughts. Now feel free to flame away.

thanks poptart. how late did you have to work? sorry to hear that...

I always enjoy your thoughts RainMan : )

@62, I stopped about 11pm. It's my own fault because I didn't accurately budget the amount of time needed to finish the project.

@61, I liked your post. It was well written and thoughtful.

"Look deep into nature, and then you will understand everything better"- Albert Einstein

I'm more or less with #4. Call the good ones just plain Christians, and call the bad ones fundotards.