GUS Annoying Facebook proselytising

[mom4him]

sigh...this is always such a tough topic.

 

1. if you post it they will come. FB and WTM and others like it are public places and people WILL post. I have been flogged many times here over my beliefs. It is the nature of the beast.

 

2. It IS your FB page though so you must have "friended" this person. Either delete their offensive comment or delete them entirely.

 

3. It is part of the mandate for Christians to go out and make disciples. What we believe requires us to share it with others, solicited or not. Now unfortunately, sometimes the WAY we share it isn't always the smoothest, or most popular, or even the most loving. We are a work in progress. :D

 

BUT, one of my best friends is a secular Jew. I have done my very best to share the gospel with her. And at one point she simply said to me, "I am aware of my options. I really don't want to discuss it any more." And I never brought it up again. And we are still best friends.

 

I think christians probably need to be a little less rabid in their sharing of the gospel and non-christians could stand to be a little more graceful when rejecting it.

 

Perhaps a simple statement of "I am aware of my options and I don't want to debate/discuss the topic" to your friend might work?

:iagree:I am a Christian and if I posted a witness of Jesus on your quote it would never be to offend you but to lead you to the truth. I would also respect anyones wishes that they do not want to hear it.

[nmoira]

 

There *is* a spot that you can put a sig sort of thing...it's over to the left, under your profile pic :)...there's no 'comment' thing there like wall posts, it's just a space where you can write whatever. Mine just says 'meow' at the moment, and our homeschool group page's little spot says "Have fun storming the castle!"

There's also a spot for favourite quotes, though I'm peeved that it's truncated with a ... see more after the latest page redesign. :glare:

[keptwoman]

:iagree:I am a Christian and if I posted a witness of Jesus on your quote it would never be to offend you but to lead you to the truth. I would also respect anyones wishes that they do not want to hear it.

 

Well lead to YOUR version of the truth. I just figure that posting something like that makes it fairly blatent that I'm not much interested in hearing about Jesus, but apparantly I was wrong on that one. Never mind, I've learnt my lesson.

[EJCMom]

It was my sig quote so I guess I'd like to say something here, if you don't mind.

 

I'm curious about something. :) Why do you call it provocative? Because it differs from what you believe? (If so, how is that any more provocative than a scripture in someone's signature?) Or is it provocative in that it simply made you think?

 

 

I think it is provocative because it challenges people to think about what they believe and why they believe it. When I used the word provocative, I didn't intend to suggest something negative. I just meant that the quote would naturally elicit a response, both from people who agree with it and from people who disagree with it.

[Geek]

:iagree:I am a Christian and if I posted a witness of Jesus on your quote it would never be to offend you but to lead you to the truth.

You don't see the irony in what you just said? Srsly? "...lead you to the truth" and "it would never be to offend you" do not belong in the same sentence.

 

Except maybe in a Monty Python skit.

 

(Would you be offended if I said that I had the truth--atheism--and wanted to lead you to it? That's something I'd never say, but I'm trying to make a point here. Humor me. :p)

[Geek]

 

I think it is provocative because it challenges people to think about what they believe and why they believe it. When I used the word provocative, I didn't intend to suggest something negative. I just meant that the quote would naturally elicit a response, both from people who agree with it and from people who disagree with it.

Thanks for clarifying. :001_smile:

[naturegirl7]

First - that is a FAB quote!

 

Second - I would be a bit miffed too. While I may expect some on a public message board to feel the need to get preachy on me - I would expect my friends to respect me and my beliefs enough to not do so. It is one thing to comment and another to get all preachy. I would never start to criticize someone who posts about praying to God for help (although I do believe God helps those who help themselves, not sit around and whine about it waiting for a miracle - but I would never post that!)

I think the person was out of line to "welcome a debate" when you told her it was upsetting to you - that is totally disrespectful and doesnt sound like a good friend to me. A good friend would have been "Oh No! I am sorry I offended you, that was not my intention at all."

 

There is a great Gandhi quote - "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.†When you are repeatedly faced with the criticism, judgement, and preaching aspect of it - this quote really seems to hit home.

[naturegirl7]

It was my sig quote so I guess I'd like to say something here, if you don't mind.

 

I'm curious about something. :) Why do you call it provocative? Because it differs from what you believe? (If so, how is that any more provocative than a scripture in someone's signature?) Or is it provocative in that it simply made you think?

 

I don't want to single you out so please realize that what I'm saying is me speaking generally. But when I look at American society I see this sort of double standard quite frequently. Anything that is not Christian is seen as "provocative" at the least, or "anti-Christian" or "attacking Christianity" at the worst.

 

Yet nonbelievers are subjected to Christian culture every. single. day. And we just do what we do: "Smile and wave, boys. Just smile and wave." Finally there are nonbelievers and non-Christian faithful speaking up in this country, and of course there are believers crying foul and claiming they are being persecuted. :confused: (Please know that I am not speaking to you, just speaking to general trends and to various experiences of friends and multitude of articles I've read.)

 

.

 

 

Very well said!

[Parrothead]

First - that is a FAB quote!

 

Second - I would be a bit miffed too. While I may expect some on a public message board to feel the need to get preachy on me - I would expect my friends to respect me and my beliefs enough to not do so. It is one thing to comment and another to get all preachy. I would never start to criticize someone who posts about praying to God for help (although I do believe God helps those who help themselves, not sit around and whine about it waiting for a miracle - but I would never post that!)

I think the person was out of line to "welcome a debate" when you told her it was upsetting to you - that is totally disrespectful and doesnt sound like a good friend to me. A good friend would have been "Oh No! I am sorry I offended you, that was not my intention at all."

 

There is a great Gandhi quote - "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” When you are repeatedly faced with the criticism, judgement, and preaching aspect of it - this quote really seems to hit home.

This!

 

I really think it is rude to comment negatively about something like this.

 

I could say more but I'm under the influence and not thinking clearly.*

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

ETA: It is morning and I need to point out the not thinking clearly and add a disclaimer to this post:

 

Disclaimer- any posts by me written after midnight eastern time should be ignored if they do not make a bit of sense or are offensive to someone. By that time of night if I'm awake I'm having issues and am probably on one type of medication or another waiting for it to kick in.

 

I'll publicly apologize to naturegirl here and I already did on page 9, quoting her upset on the next page. I did forget to put the little smilie guy holding up the I Agree sign after my, "This!" above. The first line above should read "This :iagree:"

 

I would like to point out that in the post I had already said I was under the influence and not making sense. When it is the middle of the night I often sit here on the computer waiting for allergy or insomnia medicine to kick in. I also try to let everyone know when I'm on some type of med or another.

Edited July 2, 2010 by Parrothead

[Audrey]

 

There is a great Gandhi quote - "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.†When you are repeatedly faced with the criticism, judgement, and preaching aspect of it - this quote really seems to hit home.

 

 

This has become one of our "family codes." Whenever we are faced with rude, boorish, proselytizing religious types, we remind each other to "think of Ghandi... think of Ghandi" so that we don't roll our eyes and/or say something out loud that would best be kept to ourselves at that moment.

[naturegirl7]

This!

 

I really think it is rude to comment negatively about something like this.

 

I could say more but I'm under the influence and not thinking clearly.

 

 

I am not quite sure what I said that offended you - my post was not meant to be negative or rude in any way. I was sharing a quote that I find meaningful and helpful when dealing with "I am going to shove Christ down your throat whether you like it or not" people. A quote that gives me perspective and defuses my anger and frustration in that situation.

 

I was raised Christian, I love the teachings of Christ. I simply do not love the teachings of organized religions. I do not agree with the religious agendas that are carried out in the name of Christ and of God. Historically (and even currently) the Christian faith has commented horrid evils upon other "heathen" religions under the guise of Spreading Truth and Saving Souls. Usually it was driven by greed and power, not by God. Just look at the Crusades or the Inquistitions.

 

Christ taught love, forgiveness, tolerance, humility, and DO NOT JUDGE. I often encounter Christian who do NOT embody these teachings or these qualities. They are the ones making rude (and unsolicited!) comments about my soul, about the fact that my child is a bastard cuz I was not married in a church, about my very relationship with MY God. At times, I get so frustrated I want to lash out with MY truth - but that is not what I am about, and this quote helps to remind me of MY truth.

 

There is not ONE truth, but many faces of God and many individual truths. My relationship with the Divine is just that - MINE.

I do not judge you (collectively speaking) and do not wish to be judged.

[funschooler5]

So, who is right, am I overreacting and being precious or is she rude and disrespectful? What says the Hive?

 

I would be annoyed, because every. single. day. I'm inundated with bible quotes on Facebook from several friends, and I never comment on them. If I were to post something a quote like that (something that is very general and isn't directed at a specific religion) and I were to receive a negative comment about it, or get unfriended, I would be very upset.

 

The thing that bothers me is that I've actually *thought* about posting a quote like that several times, but I haven't, because I just know it's going to offend somebody. I don't like having to feel that way. Some could say that that is something I'm bringing upon myself, but having said things like this out in real life....well, I know how people react. I just don't want to start any drama.

[Barb_]

I am not quite sure what I said that offended you - my post was not meant to be negative or rude in any way.

 

No, I'm pretty sure she was agreeing with you. "This" = :iagree:

 

Barb

[asta]

The irony of discussing (in this forum) bible quotes in siggy lines... I don't know whether to quote St. Francis or to just allow my head to explode all over the computer screen.

 

:auto:

 

 

asta

[Mrs Mungo]

The irony of discussing (in this forum) bible quotes in siggy lines... I don't know whether to quote St. Francis or to just allow my head to explode all over the computer screen.

 

:auto:

 

 

asta

 

You could borrow my quote. :)

[naturegirl7]

No, I'm pretty sure she was agreeing with you. "This" = :iagree:

 

Barb

 

I missed the "this" part somehow. Afer a long night of work, I am havinga bout of insomnia yet again - and at 3am my brain is a little foggy LOL

[Guest rubilynne4]

Ouch!

 

I agree Facebook, is a public forum, you can say whatever you want. Remove the comment, unfriend them. Unfortunately, that's the nature of online conversation, you can comment on whatever you want, even if someone finds it offensive. I stopped using FB, not because I got comments like these , but because I saw many of my friends and family say and act so differently from how I knew them. It stinks.

i also stopped using facebook for similar reasons. although i don't mind people having different beliefs, everyone does, what i saw was a really mean spirited type of gossip among people that didn't like certain people or beliefs. and i saw it on both sides. it got to be really hurtful. it was more than just disagreeing, or friendly debate, but along the lines of name calling and petty, snarky (i think that's the term wtminders use), accusatory type stuff. i just don't understand why people can't disagree agreeably. that said, i don't know what the op's friend said, but it is the nature of some christians to share their beliefs (as it is mine), but usually if someone doesn't want to hear it, and let's me know i have no problem discontinuing my sharing. i would just probably let the friend know that you have heard what she said, but would prefer not to talk about it further, and would appreciate no more posts to your page discssing her beliefs. if that doesn't work, you have the option do block those posts in several ways.

[Guest rubilynne4]

You don't see the irony in what you just said? Srsly? "...lead you to the truth" and "it would never be to offend you" do not belong in the same sentence.

 

Except maybe in a Monty Python skit.

 

(Would you be offended if I said that I had the truth--atheism--and wanted to lead you to it? That's something I'd never say, but I'm trying to make a point here. Humor me. :p)

actually no, i wouldn't be offended. i'm not the person who originally posted, but i am a christian. i wouldn't agree with you necessarily, but i wouldn't be offended. why do those two statements not belong in the same sentence. if you really believed you had the truth about something, for example, "racism is wrong," and you shared that belief with someone who didn't believe that way (maybe they believe racism is right) because you wanted to lead them to the truth would you think that was ironic, or offensive?

Edited July 2, 2010 by rubilynne4

[Peela]

..when I look at American society I see this sort of double standard quite frequently. Anything that is not Christian is seen as "provocative" at the least, or "anti-Christian" or "attacking Christianity" at the worst.

 

Yet nonbelievers are subjected to Christian culture every. single. day. And we just do what we do: "Smile and wave, boys. Just smile and wave." Finally there are nonbelievers and non-Christian faithful speaking up in this country, and of course there are believers crying foul and claiming they are being persecuted. :confused:

 

I really think you secular people in the U.S. must have a harder time than we in Australia. I think we must be a much higher proportion of heathens over here because I dont come across it much- enough to know it exists, but not much. Although I have strong Christian relatives, they are the minority in my life- I am not surrounded by them. America seems to identify as a very Christian nation, in a quite fundamentalist /evangalistic type of way, wheras here, although most might identify with Christianity in a general, cultural way...I think the proportion who are "active" is much, much less. It almost sounds like you need to defend your lack of faith in the Christian religion, as a human right or something.

 

 

 

Well lead to YOUR version of the truth. I just figure that posting something like that makes it fairly blatent that I'm not much interested in hearing about Jesus, but apparantly I was wrong on that one. Never mind, I've learnt my lesson.

 

Yeah, I would have thought posting something like that would make it pretty clear where you stand too, Sandra, but apparently that just makes you fair game for someone to tell you where they stand just as strongly. As if your quote threatens them so much they must say something.

The more I think about it, the more I think I would defriend them once I had had my fun debating with them.

[Heather in Neverland]

You don't see the irony in what you just said? Srsly? "...lead you to the truth" and "it would never be to offend you" do not belong in the same sentence.

 

Except maybe in a Monty Python skit.

 

(Would you be offended if I said that I had the truth--atheism--and wanted to lead you to it? That's something I'd never say, but I'm trying to make a point here. Humor me. :p)

 

Well, no. I would not be offended. I assume that what you believe...you believe to be TRUE. I mean, who INTENTIONALLY believes a LIE? So if you tell me you are an atheist I assume that you believe atheism to be true. Why else would you believe it? And if you knew I was NOT an atheist and talked to me about atheism I would assume that in YOUR mind you are sharing TRUTH with me. How could I be offended by that? At worst I would think you were misled but I would not be offended simply because you believe something different than I do and tried to tell me about it.

 

Now, obviously there are those that go FAR beyound just "sharing" their beliefs (I call them christian bounty hunters but this could apply to any group that goes oveboard) and that is why I mentioned the need for them to be less rabid. But really, unless they are purposely trying to offend you, "pass the bean dip" works wonders.

[nd293]

Yes, rude and disrespectful covers it, because, as you rightly mention, you would be marked as insensitive (at best) if you made similar comments about her religion.

 

It's a fabulous quote, by the way - it captures exactly my approach to life/religion. Up there with the Darwin quote that ends - "Let each man hope and believe what he can."

[Margo out of lurking]

Christ taught love, forgiveness, tolerance, humility, and DO NOT JUDGE.

 

He also taught to "judge with righteous judgment."

 

* * *

 

Facebook can be problematic because people have different boundaries. If someone held a different religious belief, I would not comment. I have commented when a fellow believer has misquoted something--but I would never "correct" a doctrinal or theological difference.

 

As to the original poster, yes, I'd be annoyed. I would find that kind of response inappropriate and unnecessary. It's hardly going to convert someone.

 

I don't have any problem commenting on political posts though, and as long as my friends are polite, I have no issues when they comment on my political posts. We don't have to agree.

 

But those are my "boundaries," and (unfortunately, haha!) others don't hold the same lines.

[amy g.]

I haven't read all of the replies. I just wanted to say that I think what they did is very rude. I would delete their post if it were on my page to send a clear message.

 

I'm not offended by what others post on their own walls, but I have gone so far as to instruct my teens to not put anything religious or political on their own pages. They can pm something to a friend, but that is different.

 

I told them to think about how much they love certain people with different beliefs. How could it be right to alienate the people you love?

[MelanieM]

Well, no. I would not be offended. I assume that what you believe...you believe to be TRUE. I mean, who INTENTIONALLY believes a LIE? So if you tell me you are an atheist I assume that you believe atheism to be true. Why else would you believe it? And if you knew I was NOT an atheist and talked to me about atheism I would assume that in YOUR mind you are sharing TRUTH with me. How could I be offended by that? At worst I would think you were misled but I would not be offended simply because you believe something different than I do and tried to tell me about it.

 

 

I think the key is in the "lead you..." part of the statement. It suggests that you believe the truth and the other person believes a falsehood, and so you can show them the error of their ways so they can find the real truth, and be just like you. That's very different than "I'd like to share what I believe to be true", or some other respectful version of this idea.

 

There are those of us that believe everyone gets to choose their own truth. I think it's the height of arrogance to suggest that you know the path of truth for another person better than they know it themselves. Who's to say what GUS has in mind for that person's journey?

[MelanieM]

I've been trying to figure out what GUS means all day.

 

I give up.

 

:bigear:??:D

 

GUS = God/Universe/Source

 

It's basically a way to refer to spirituality without involving religion.

[fivetails]

I think the key is in the "lead you..." part of the statement. It suggests that you believe the truth and the other person believes a falsehood, and so you can show them the error of their ways so they can find the real truth, and be just like you. That's very different than "I'd like to share what I believe to be true", or some other respectful version of this idea.

 

There are those of us that believe everyone gets to choose their own truth. I think it's the height of arrogance to suggest that you know the path of truth for another person better than they know it themselves. Who's to say what GUS has in mind for that person's journey?

 

There's two completely different ways of thinking going on there though...

 

Person A = believes that everyone gets to choose their own truth.

 

Person B = believes that there is only ONE truth.

 

The two different ways of looking at things just can't meet in the middle, i don't think.... how could they, when Person B *knows - with their mind, heart, very core of their being - that they have the truth?

 

*using the word "knows" because I think it's stronger than "believes"...

 

I'm not saying that "lead you to the truth" wouldn't be annoying ~ just that I do understand why people say things like that... they believe - they KNOW - that there is only ONE right, ONE truth, ONE _____.........

 

/ramble

[Heather in Neverland]

There's two completely different ways of thinking going on there though...

 

Person A = believes that everyone gets to choose their own truth.

 

Person B = believes that there is only ONE truth.

 

The two different ways of looking at things just can't meet in the middle, i don't think.... how could they, when Person B *knows - with their mind, heart, very core of their being - that they have the truth?

 

*using the word "knows" because I think it's stronger than "believes"...

 

I'm not saying that "lead you to the truth" wouldn't be annoying ~ just that I do understand why people say things like that... they believe - they KNOW - that there is only ONE right, ONE truth, ONE _____.........

 

/ramble

 

And I always find it interesting that people believe we can each create our own truth AND we can each be right. If something is true then doesn't that automatically mean that the opposing belief is false? If I say there is a God and you say there isn't, we can't both be right. And when you claim there is no absolute truth, you just made an absolute truth statement. So you can't really say "we can all choose our own truth"... the best you could hope for is "I have no idea what truth is."

[Geek]

I really think you secular people in the U.S. must have a harder time than we in Australia. I think we must be a much higher proportion of heathens over here because I dont come across it much- enough to know it exists, but not much.

Hmm. I think that this is true within certain populations, particularly the home school subculture. But within American society as a whole it's more the appearance of religion that must be maintained. But that is changing as the current 18-40 age group stats demonstrate that younger Americans don't go to church and consider themselves "nonreligious". (Sounds like you have the same thing going on in your country.)

 

The survey found 20 per cent of young people did not believe in a god and 32 per cent were unsure.

It also found just 19 per cent of those who identify themselves as Christian were actively involved in a church, attending services at least once a month.

 

 

We have leaders who must feign belief because Americans would rather have an open homosexual as president than an atheist. Even many of the people who go to church once a year or less still loathe to let go of the label "Christian".

 

It almost sounds like you need to defend your lack of faith in the Christian religion, as a human right or something.

If you look at the situation from certain angles, I think this is true. On the whole, though, I don't think it has come to that. I can easily envision this, however, if the radical religious right get what they're really after: a theocracy.

 

As if your quote threatens them so much they must say something.

 

This is how I see it. I know that within myself at any rate I have the most visceral reaction to things I fear. Edited July 2, 2010 by Geek

[jazzyfizzle]

Facebook is weird isn't it? Is it a conversation? Is it talking to ourselves? Is it simply letting the words out of our brains to float around and have random people comment? If one of my non-Christian friends posted that I probably wouldn't post anything, I also don't tend to post when one of my liberal friends posts something I don't agree with about life/politics. Because to me Facebook is not really a conversation that tends to move toward productive debate and conclusions, although sometimes it does.

 

Yes! I am glad to hear someone else is confused by this!

[fivetails]

There's two completely different ways of thinking going on there though...

 

Person A = believes that everyone gets to choose their own truth.

 

Person B = believes that there is only ONE truth.

 

The two different ways of looking at things just can't meet in the middle, i don't think.... how could they, when Person B *knows - with their mind, heart, very core of their being - that they have the truth?

 

*using the word "knows" because I think it's stronger than "believes"...

 

I'm not saying that "lead you to the truth" wouldn't be annoying ~ just that I do understand why people say things like that... they believe - they KNOW - that there is only ONE right, ONE truth, ONE _____.........

 

/ramble

And I always find it interesting that people believe we can each create our own truth AND we can each be right. If something is true then doesn't that automatically mean that the opposing belief is false? If I say there is a God and you say there isn't, we can't both be right. And when you claim there is no absolute truth, you just made an absolute truth statement. So you can't really say "we can all choose our own truth"... the best you could hope for is "I have no idea what truth is."

 

Yeah..maybe my wording wasn't the best there ("choose their own truth")...I wasn't sure how else to put it though....

 

"And when you claim there is no absolute truth, you just made an absolute truth statement."

 

plz to not be giving me such headaches. :laugh:

 

 

It amazes me when I think about how there are soooo many people with soooo many different beliefs... and all of them think they're right.

 

How can that be?

 

Of course, it can't be..

 

...or can it?

 

:willy_nilly:

[Geek]

It amazes me when I think about how there are soooo many people with soooo many different beliefs... and all of them think they're right.

 

How can that be?

 

Of course, it can't be..

 

...or can it?

 

:willy_nilly:

This is as good a time as any to draw a distinction between agnosticism and atheism. Many times people claim the label "agnostic" as though it's some halfway point between belief and unbelief. It's not since it doesn't address belief but rather the issue of what we can know and cannot know. (Agnostic is the opposite of gnostic.) Here is Wiki's take on things.

Think of it like a matrix:

 

 

I'm an agnostic atheist.

[naturegirl7]

There's two completely different ways of thinking going on there though...

 

Person A = believes that everyone gets to choose their own truth.

 

Person B = believes that there is only ONE truth.

 

The two different ways of looking at things just can't meet in the middle, i don't think.... how could they, when Person B *knows - with their mind, heart, very core of their being - that they have the truth?

 

We CAN meet in the middle by simply respecting each other's right to have a different POV/belief. Live and let live kinda thing.

 

Everyone believes that their spiritual path is the correct one for them - and YAY for that. Be happy and proud to walk your path, even invite others nicely to walk with you when they seem interested, but do NOT attempt to drag others onto it against their will or berate them for choosing a different path.

 

YOUR truth doesn't have to be the truth for the entire globe. it sure does not negate the validity of MY truth for me. Believing something does NOT make it true. It simply makes it a belief system. People have a right to believe (or not believe) in any concept of God they choose. (just as they have a right to different parenting philosophies, different politic associations, etc)

We have no right to oppress and harass others simply because they do not share a commonly accepted belief system. Respect is a 2way street and it would be nice if the NON Judeo-christian religions got just a little bit of respect.

 

For me, the divine wears many faces not just one - which makes it easy for me to see beyond the "my truth is right and you are wrong" agenda of organized religions - if you study world religions you will find that all the great teachers teach the same basic message - how does that not lend itself to a greater, universal truth about the very nature of humanity? :D

[Garga]

I really think you secular people in the U.S. must have a harder time than we in Australia. I think we must be a much higher proportion of heathens over here because I dont come across it much- enough to know it exists, but not much. Although I have strong Christian relatives, they are the minority in my life- I am not surrounded by them. America seems to identify as a very Christian nation, in a quite fundamentalist /evangalistic type of way, wheras here, although most might identify with Christianity in a general, cultural way...I think the proportion who are "active" is much, much less. It almost sounds like you need to defend your lack of faith in the Christian religion, as a human right or something.

 

 

Maybe you're right. I am a Christian. Every now and then, our church has a visiting minister who is a missionary who was raised in Austria (and has the cutest accent) but currently lives in Sweden who often goes to Africa and Eurasia on missions trips. (He gets around :D)

 

He says that it's nice for him to come to America and teach in a church because he doesn't have to lay a lot of ground work. Everyone just sort of knows what he's talking about when he makes references to themes, events or people in the bible without him having to explain it in depth. He can jump right into the meat of his message.

 

He also says that the people in America (who aren't just the church people he's meeting, but are just everyday people he meets) tend to treat him nicer about his Christianity than they are in Europe. When he tells people in his European countries that he's a missionary, he says they tend to look at him askance and some with suspicion. But when he tells random people in America (people on the airplane who say, "What do you do for a living?"), the Americans are more polite or accepting about it. They don't see it as an unusual thing.

 

So, from his point of view, yes, America is more steeped in Christianity than some of our counterparts (like Europe and Australia.)

[Parrothead]

I am not quite sure what I said that offended you - my post was not meant to be negative or rude in any way.

Sorry, was under the influence of allergy meds and it was making me very very sleepy. I forgot to hit his button. :iagree:

 

It should have said, "This! :iagree:" then gone on to what ever I was agreeing with.

 

Again, I'm sorry about the misunderstanding.

 

Disclaimer- any posts by me written after midnight eastern time should be ignored if they do not make a bit of sense or are offensive to someone. By that time of night if I'm awake I'm having issues and am probably on one type of medication or another waiting for it to kick in.

[jewellsmommy]

We CAN meet in the middle by simply respecting each other's right to have a different POV/belief. Live and let live kinda thing.

 

Everyone believes that their spiritual path is the correct one for them - and YAY for that. Be happy and proud to walk your path, even invite others nicely to walk with you when they seem interested, but do NOT attempt to drag others onto it against their will or berate them for choosing a different path.

 

YOUR truth doesn't have to be the truth for the entire globe. it sure does not negate the validity of MY truth for me. Believing something does NOT make it true. It simply makes it a belief system. People have a right to believe (or not believe) in any concept of God they choose. (just as they have a right to different parenting philosophies, different politic associations, etc)

We have no right to oppress and harass others simply because they do not share a commonly accepted belief system. Respect is a 2way street and it would be nice if the NON Judeo-christian religions got just a little bit of respect.

 

For me, the divine wears many faces not just one - which makes it easy for me to see beyond the "my truth is right and you are wrong" agenda of organized religions - if you study world religions you will find that all the great teachers teach the same basic message - how does that not lend itself to a greater, universal truth about the very nature of humanity? :D

 

 

I am in agreement with a lot of what you are saying in regards to respect and what not. And as far as the issue with the op there is a fine line that is hard to walk when it comes to respecting others beliefs and talking about your own. There is equal right on both side and should be respectful restraint exercised when appropriate.

 

I think the dilemma comes when you say "everyone is allowed their own belief system and that should be respected." I agree, but for a Christian being allowed to follow our belief system involves the desire to tell others about what we believe to be "the love of Christ." It is the cornerstone of the practice of evangelical Christian faith. So, to say that Christians should not "tell/harass* (i will get to this in a minute) others is to deny us the practice of our faith. When you believe that Christians should not evangelize YOU are imposing your belief (of NOT evangelizing) as superior to our belief (of evangelizing). Which, ironically, is what people complain about Christians.

 

Now, I agree that no body should be harassed! Please read that line again. What do you consider harassment? To remove it from religious grounds: If someone tells me about this awesome curriculum they use and how they know it would work great for me..blah, blah...If I have already looked at it and rejected it, I say no thank you..not my brand :001_smile:. KWIM. But for some reason when a conversation, like my example, remotely crosses into the religious area, people throw a fit.

 

I say none of this in a snarky tone. I desire peaceful understanding on all sides. Please understand that this whole "how dare you talk to me about Christianity, don't harass, that is rude etc." thing is to most Christians what the "socialization argument" is to most homeschoolers. :D

[Cricket]

Facebook is weird isn't it? Is it a conversation? Is it talking to ourselves? Is it simply letting the words out of our brains to float around and have random people comment? If one of my non-Christian friends posted that I probably wouldn't post anything, I also don't tend to post when one of my liberal friends posts something I don't agree with about life/politics. Because to me Facebook is not really a conversation that tends to move toward productive debate and conclusions, although sometimes it does.

 

I wouldn't have said anything either. I might have posted my own quote stating my beliefs. I tend to leave those thing alone. My sister posted something a week or so ago and one of her friends posted three long rambling comments about how wrong my sister was. Well, I couldn't let that go so I started firing back. :D But usually I just roll my eyes and go on with life. :)

[mommaduck]

Sorry, was under the influence of allergy meds and it was making me very very sleepy. I forgot to hit his button. :iagree:

 

It should have said, "This! :iagree:" then gone on to what ever I was agreeing with.

 

Again, I'm sorry about the misunderstanding.

 

Disclaimer- any posts by me written after midnight eastern time should be ignored if they do not make a bit of sense or are offensive to someone. By that time of night if I'm awake I'm having issues and am probably on one type of medication or another waiting for it to kick in.

Not sure if we should revoke your posting privileges after that time or encourage you to post more for the fun of it :p

[tex-mex]

What would you do with this?

I posted the Marcus Aurelis quote that I saw in someones sig:

‘Live a good life. If there are gods and they

are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will

welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods,

...but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no

gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will

live on in the memories of your loved ones.’

 

And an aquantaince replied with something about Jesus and forgiveness not virtues, or something along those lines. I am really quite annoyed.

I feel that if I did something similar to her, for instance suggested that the occurance she was praising Jesus for was due to karma, well, I think she would be a bit mad and find it disrespectful to her beliefs. But when I suggested that she had been disrespectful to mine she argued the point and welcomed well reasoned debate or something. Well I'm not interested in debating Jesus, or being proselytised to.

 

So, who is right, am I overreacting and being precious or is she rude and disrespectful? What says the Hive?

 

Without reading anyone's posts on this topic... I'm going to jump in and voice that the siggy does kinda invites a reply if not interesting debate? However, to argue or harass like a Christian Crusader -- er, um, no. Especially if it is on FB, WTM, or email. Nowadays, there is no barrier to opinion a la the magic www, kwim?

 

BTW, I recently changed my siggy line to a verse that was appropriate to what is going on in my personal life and friends IRL... LOL... ;) And if someone replied to it (or my past Kooky Conspiracy/Spiritual posts), all the more interesting discussion!

Edited July 2, 2010 by tex-mex

[MelanieM]

There's two completely different ways of thinking going on there though...

 

Person A = believes that everyone gets to choose their own truth.

 

Person B = believes that there is only ONE truth.

 

The two different ways of looking at things just can't meet in the middle, i don't think.... how could they, when Person B *knows - with their mind, heart, very core of their being - that they have the truth?

 

*using the word "knows" because I think it's stronger than "believes"...

 

I'm not saying that "lead you to the truth" wouldn't be annoying ~ just that I do understand why people say things like that... they believe - they KNOW - that there is only ONE right, ONE truth, ONE _____.........

 

/ramble

 

I think I went off-point a little in my post that you quoted, perhaps getting away from what I intended to say and into my own beliefs a little too much.

 

I don't take issue with someone believing their truth is *the* truth. In fact, my belief that everyone can have a different truth is my own version of truth! The point I was trying to make, and what I believe was originally being touched upon, is the approach used when trying to define your personal truth for others.

 

I don't really have a problem with people saying "this is what I know to be true", even if that truth is excluding anyone else's right to claim a truth (though the idea does boggle my mind, even within a Christian construct). Rather, it's the whole conversion aspect that feels... well, insulting and invasive, I suppose. The "lead you to the truth" type comments send a message to me that the person has no respect for my beliefs, and that shuts down my desire for conversation. I think a lot of Christians have a hard time understanding this idea, and it makes them their own worst enemies where "bringing people to Jesus" is concerned.

 

Also, I want to say that it's not only Christians who KNOW. I absolutely KNOW that my beliefs are the ONE truth *for me*. My gods speak as clearly to me as anyone else's does to them.

 

And I always find it interesting that people believe we can each create our own truth AND we can each be right. If something is true then doesn't that automatically mean that the opposing belief is false? If I say there is a God and you say there isn't, we can't both be right. And when you claim there is no absolute truth, you just made an absolute truth statement. So you can't really say "we can all choose our own truth"... the best you could hope for is "I have no idea what truth is."

 

(emphasis mine)

 

No actually, saying something is true doesn't mean everything else is false. I believe that truth is an individual thing, and that means what is true for me does not need to be true for you. Maybe God has shown you one truth and me another. Isn't it possible that God has a different message, an individual path, for each person?

 

To further confuse things, I believe that saying there is no absolute truth includes the possibility that there is an absolute truth for some. Because all things are possible in my reality, and "all things" includes exactly that... everything is possible.

 

Now if you really want me to try and confuse you, just ask me what I think of the true nature of time and space. ;)

[Parrothead]

Not sure if we should revoke your posting privileges after that time or encourage you to post more for the fun of it :p

If my posting privileges are revoked due to my drug habit, I'd be permanently banned. I'm more susceptible when I'm tired or mad at dh. (mad at dh was what got me banned last week)

 

I'll let the group know when I actually get more Ambien. I think those are the best. :lol:

[ShutterBug]

Here's my take on the whole issue.

 

The OP posted a quote on her FB page that reflects her views, opinions, beliefs, etc.. She "proselytized" first to all those who can see her page, right? She put something out there because she wanted people to read it, to reflect on it...to know that she agreed with the sentiment.

 

Isn't that the whole gist of FB? You post something and then people post feedback. If you post something mundane then you can expect mundane feedback. If you post something a bit more insightful then you should expect responses with a bit more insight in them as well.

 

For example, if I were to post "I like bananas" on my FB I'd fully expect feedback ranging from a few "Likes" to some "Me toos!" and maybe even a "Blech..bananas are mother nature's refuse".

 

It's FB, I know the drill..I post something and folks post back what they think of my post. If I'm going to something that reflects my beliefs, faith, political leanings or whatever I'm fully aware that all my "Friends" aren't going to agree with me and then I go put my big girl panties on and accept whatver comments they make...whether I agree with them or not.

 

If you feel you should be able to put something out there and not have to hear the opinions of those who disagree then certainly don't put it on your FB page.

[naturegirl7]

 

I think the dilemma comes when you say "everyone is allowed their own belief system and that should be respected." I agree, but for a Christian being allowed to follow our belief system involves the desire to tell others about what we believe to be "the love of Christ." It is the cornerstone of the practice of evangelical Christian faith. So, to say that Christians should not "tell/harass* (i will get to this in a minute) others is to deny us the practice of our faith. When you believe that Christians should not evangelize YOU are imposing your belief (of NOT evangelizing) as superior to our belief (of evangelizing). Which, ironically, is what people complain about Christians.

 

Now, I agree that no body should be harassed! Please read that line again. What do you consider harassment? To remove it from religious grounds: If someone tells me about this awesome curriculum they use and how they know it would work great for me..blah, blah...If I have already looked at it and rejected it, I say no thank you..not my brand :001_smile:. KWIM. But for some reason when a conversation, like my example, remotely crosses into the religious area, people throw a fit.

 

 

 

Evangelizing is a practice more so than a belief. Any religion can evangelize, it is not something that Christians have stock in. I think there is a respectful way to share your beliefs. You can make yourself available and discuss it with those who are interested without making those who are not interested feel uncomfortable.

It would be like me planning to dance under the stars to celebrate the Full Moon. I could say hey, I am going to celebrate the Full Moon this Sat if you want to come and leave it at that - just an open invite. Or I could get pushy about it - I could build a bonfire in your front yard and strip down to nothing and sing and dance and celebrate the Full Moon - right there in your face so you have to experience it to some degree and would maybe finally realize how great it is.

 

I think if I did this - even fully clothed, people would call the cops. I could do this in my own backyard in clothes and someone would still call the cops on me. Yet you expressing Christian beliefs on the street corners, in stores, at my front door - that is all deemed acceptable behavior. Talking to a stranger about God and the state of their soul is totally acceptable - yet almost all of those same people get offended and start blathering about the Devil and Satanism if any non-Judeo Christian religious belief is brought up in daily conversation. And that is highly annoying double standard.

 

I totally get the desire to share your beliefs with someone. It is like reading a great book or seeing the best movie - we have a natural desire to share what makes us feel good with others. But there is a time and a place and a manner in which to do it. If I knew a friend was not comfortable with horror movies, I would not spend a half hour trying to convince her of how good the latest horror movie was and how much she would regret never giving it a try. That would be disrespectful and devalue her feelings.

 

Anyways, back to my point...

It is a practice that is based upon a specific belief - but is ultimately seperate from said belief. And it can be actively practiced in a way that respects each individual.

[Rosie_0801]

And I always find it interesting that people believe we can each create our own truth AND we can each be right. If something is true then doesn't that automatically mean that the opposing belief is false? If I say there is a God and you say there isn't, we can't both be right. And when you claim there is no absolute truth, you just made an absolute truth statement. So you can't really say "we can all choose our own truth"... the best you could hope for is "I have no idea what truth is."

 

Ah. Is this where the absolute truth thread came from?

 

This is how I resolve that little issue:

 

1. If Person A experiences God, then they have one.

2. If Person B doesn't experience God and is happy for it to be that way, they don't have a God.

 

I don't have any use for a God, so I don't have one, but I'm completely convinced you have one. So, as far as my little brain is concerned, we're both right. I think gods are like sunglasses. I can't see through the glasses you are wearing, but I can see that you are wearing them. The fact that I have no desire to buy a pair like yours in no way changes the shade you are seeing. You have no desire to wear glasses like mine, but that doesn't mean I'm not seeing the shade I'm seeing.

 

We run into the problem you describe when you tell me God exists outside of your head and I reply that he lives in a lot of other people's heads too, but he/she/it doesn't exist outside of people's head. We can't both be right there, but I don't care because your glasses fit you, I'm comfortable with mine and I'm quite convinced that people have different sized heads so the same brand of glasses won't fit everyone and I don't mind at all that you think all other brands except yours are so shoddily made that no one should buy them. Anyway, I have a translator in my head that converts Christianese into whatever it is I speak. It's a funky gadget. It even translates from me into Christianese!

 

:)

Rosie

Edited July 3, 2010 by Rosie_0801

[HeidiKC]

I think that when people post something on FB, there's almost an expectation that people will comment. And that's whether they agree or not. So I would fully expect someone to comment if they didn't agree (I also think the post is a bit provocative), but to do so in a respectful and friendly way. The person commenting is supposedly a friend, so I would hope that person would politely disagree and that the OP would then also politely respond.

 

I think that posting anything that is sort of a "hot" topic - and of course religion definitely falls into that category! - is definitely asking for a debate of some sort. People feel strongly about these things! Now it is different if someone posts something like, "Praise the Lord, all is well" or "Loving Mother Earth today". Those posts don't ask for debate like one that is a description or statement of faith. I think it would be rude and out of line if someone commented negatively on a post like that, especially since the poster is just rejoicing in their faith and wanting to share that happiness.

Edited July 3, 2010 by HeidiKC

[Heather in Neverland]

Ah. Is this where the absolute truth thread came from?

 

This is how I resolve that little issue:

 

1. If Person A experiences God, then they have one.

2. If Person B doesn't experience God and is happy for it to be that way, they don't have a God.

 

We run into the problem you describe when you tell me God exists outside of your head and I reply that he lives in a lot of other people's heads too, but he/she/it doesn't exist outside of people's head. We can't both be right there, but I don't care because your glasses fit you, I'm comfortable with mine and I'm quite convinced that people have different sized heads so the same brand of glasses won't fit everyone and I don't mind at all that you think all other brands except yours are so shoddily made that no one should buy them. Anyway, I have a translator in my head that converts Christianese into whatever it is I speak. It's a funky gadget. It even translates from me into Christianese!

 

You are so funny! Sometimes I think I need a translator like that!

 

But yes, it is a totally different conversation...absolute truth vs. "truth-ish" or subjective truth (which is an oxymoron in my brain). In absolute truth, two opposing truths cannot both be truth. In "truth-ish" we can all believe whatever we want and say it is true just because we believe it. So I can believe the sky is purple with green stripes and claim it to be MY truth and you cannot tell me it is NOT true. We just have different "truths".

 

:)

Rosie

.

[Heather in Neverland]

 

 

No actually, saying something is true doesn't mean everything else is false. That's correct. But if something is TRUE then it DOES mean that OPPOSING truths are false. The sky is NOT purple with green stripes no matter how much MY truth says it is. And as in my example from above, there either IS a God or there is NOT a God. Both cannot be TRUE. I can believe one thing and you can believe another and we won't really know until we die but at some point we will face the the TRUTH. And at that point what I believe or what you believe will no longer be relevant. Only TRUTH will matter. I believe that truth is an individual thing, and that means what is true for me does not need to be true for you. Maybe God has shown you one truth and me another. Isn't it possible that God has a different message, an individual path, for each person?

 

To further confuse things, I believe that saying there is no absolute truth includes the possibility that there is an absolute truth for some. Because all things are possible in my reality, and "all things" includes exactly that... everything is possible. But the statement contradicts itself. The words "there is no absolute truth" is, in itself, a statement of absolute truth. So it is impossible to say there is NO absolute truth because you believe at least one thing to be absolutely true...

 

Now if you really want me to try and confuse you, just ask me what I think of the true nature of time and space. ;) Oh heavens no. I think my brain would melt!

.

[Rosie_0801]

.In absolute truth, two opposing truths cannot both be truth.

 

:) This is why I said in the other thread that I think there is a lot less absolute truth than we'd like there to be.

 

In "truth-ish" we can all believe whatever we want and say it is true just because we believe it.

 

I think this is where my hubby (who has been lurking here) would start ranting about Kohlberg again. Aren't you all glad he doesn't have an account? :eek:

 

So I can believe the sky is purple with green stripes and claim it to be MY truth and you cannot tell me it is NOT true. We just have different "truths".

 

I could suggest you get your eyes checked :lol:

 

:)

Rosie

[MelanieM]

It would be like me planning to dance under the stars to celebrate the Full Moon. I could say hey, I am going to celebrate the Full Moon this Sat if you want to come and leave it at that - just an open invite. Or I could get pushy about it - I could build a bonfire in your front yard and strip down to nothing and sing and dance and celebrate the Full Moon - right there in your face so you have to experience it to some degree and would maybe finally realize how great it is.

 

Excellent post! And if you ever have a full moon celebration near me, I'd love an invite! (Wishing I had a yard big enough for a bonfire to dance around...)

 

 

That's correct. But if something is TRUE then it DOES mean that OPPOSING truths are false. The sky is NOT purple with green stripes no matter how much MY truth says it is. And as in my example from above, there either IS a God or there is NOT a God. Both cannot be TRUE. I can believe one thing and you can believe another and we won't really know until we die but at some point we will face the the TRUTH. And at that point what I believe or what you believe will no longer be relevant. Only TRUTH will matter.

 

Well, I really do believe that every single person can be experiencing life with their own set of absolute truths that differ from the absolute truths of others. So *my* truth says that there can be a God and no God at the same time, just as *your* truth says there's either a God or no God.

 

Or maybe a better way of saying it is that I don't think there is any absolute truth, and all truth is created by the observer as personal truth. (Or sometimes collective truth.)

 

But the statement contradicts itself. The words "there is no absolute truth" is, in itself, a statement of absolute truth. So it is impossible to say there is NO absolute truth because you believe at least one thing to be absolutely true...

 

 

Exactly... which is why I said I was further confusing things. :lol: I get that *my* truth that there is no truth is a truth in itself. But it's mine, and I believe it, and therefore it's as real to me as yours is to you. :D

 

Rosie... loved your post!

[Geek]

Ah. Is this where the absolute truth thread came from?

 

This is how I resolve that little issue:

 

1. If Person A experiences God, then they have one.

2. If Person B doesn't experience God and is happy for it to be that way, they don't have a God.

 

I don't have any use for a God, so I don't have one, but I'm completely convinced you have one. So, as far as my little brain is concerned, we're both right. I think gods are like sunglasses. I can't see through the glasses you are wearing, but I can see that you are wearing them. The fact that I have no desire to buy a pair like yours in no way changes the shade you are seeing. You have no desire to wear glasses like mine, but that doesn't mean I'm not seeing the shade I'm seeing.

 

We run into the problem you describe when you tell me God exists outside of your head and I reply that he lives in a lot of other people's heads too, but he/she/it doesn't exist outside of people's head. We can't both be right there, but I don't care because your glasses fit you, I'm comfortable with mine and I'm quite convinced that people have different sized heads so the same brand of glasses won't fit everyone and I don't mind at all that you think all other brands except yours are so shoddily made that no one should buy them. Anyway, I have a translator in my head that converts Christianese into whatever it is I speak. It's a funky gadget. It even translates from me into Christianese!

 

:)

Rosie

Very well said.

[CindyPTN]

It's code for secular content. I'm trying to find the thread where it was first discussed to explain properly.

Here tis:

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=161705&highlight=GUS&page=4

Post 39 first mentions it, and is then followed by a discussion to use it to label secular content.

 

Thanks. I was wondering too and completely lost on the connection to the discussion. Interesting discussion though.