muslim balance
One of our commentators sent me a link to this article this morning by Daniel Pipes which reports how muslim populations are “divided by conspiracy and hate”. I thought that some of the reported results were interesting, and at times shocking, so I thought I would go to the original report of the study. And there are certainly some differences in “spin”, even actual numbers.
Pipes says:
In not one Muslim population polled did most people believe Arabs carried out the September 11, 2001, attacks on the US. The proportions range from a mere 15 per cent in Pakistan holding Arabs responsible to 48per cent among French Muslims. Confirming recent negative trends in Turkey, the number of Turks who point the finger at Arabs has declined from 46 per cent in 2002 to 16per cent today. In other words, in each of these 10 Muslim communities, most view 9/11 as a hoax perpetrated by the US Government, Israel or some other agency. [emphasis mine]
Okay, you might have thought those numbers were actually lifted from the report. I can’t find the raw numbers online, but this is certainly not the way that the researchers elected to describe the results of their surveys (as shocking as they might be):
In one of the survey’s most striking findings, majorities in Indonesia, Turkey, Egypt, and Jordan say that they do not believe groups of Arabs carried out the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The percentage of Turks expressing disbelief that Arabs carried out the 9/11 attacks has increased from 43% in a 2002 Gallup survey to 59% currently. And this attitude is not limited to Muslims in predominantly Muslim countries - 56% of British Muslims say they do not believe Arabs carried out the terror attacks against the U.S., compared with just 17% who do.
The graphs do show that 16% of those surveyed in Turkey believe that Arabs carried out the attacks, but I can find no support for Pipes conclusion (in bold) in the numbers. Significantly, this question was not asked of non-Muslims so we don’t know what the “control” viewpoint is. But some of Pipes’ other analyses are more misleading:
Of all the Muslim populations polled, most displayed support for Osama bin Laden. Asked whether they had confidence in him, Muslims replied positively, ranging from 8 per cent (Turkey) to 72 per cent (Nigeria).
Suicide bombing is also popular. Muslims who call it justified range from 13 per cent (Germany) to 69 per cent (Nigeria). These appalling numbers suggest terrorism by Muslims has deep roots and will remain a danger for years to come.
The report uses different numbers and puts a decidedly different spin on these results:
Confidence in Osama bin Laden also has fallen in most Muslim countries in recent years. This is especially the case in Jordan, where just 24% express at least some confidence in bin Laden now, compared with 60% a year ago. A sizable number of Pakistanis (38%) continue to say they have at least some confidence in the al Qaeda leader to do the right thing regarding world affairs, but significantly fewer do so now than in May 2005 (51%). However, Nigeria’s Muslims represent a conspicuous exception to this trend; 61% of Nigeria’s Muslims say they have at least some confidence in bin Laden, up from 44% in 2003.
The belief that terrorism is justifiable in the defense of Islam, while less extensive than in previous surveys, still has a sizable number of adherents. Among Nigeria’s Muslim population, for instance, nearly half (46%) feel that suicide bombings can be justified often or sometimes in the defense of Islam. Even among Europe’s Muslim minorities, roughly one-in-seven in France, Spain, and Great Britain feel that suicide bombings against civilian targets can at least sometimes be justified to defend Islam against its enemies.
I can’t find an explanation for the different in numbers. Pipes says 72% of Nigerian Muslims support Osama, whereas the report says 61%. Pipes says 69% of Nigerians say suicide bombings are justified, the report summary says 46% believe that bombings can be justified often or sometimes. I suspect that Pipes has added on to these figures another category of respondents - those who say that suicide bombing is justified rarely or only in exceptional circumstances. And he has avoided any mention of the fact that these figures are dropping, despite the fact that he felt it significant to list the increasing support for Bin Laden over time.
There is no denying that surveys such as this include some concerning results. But Pipes’ article has distorted the figures and used them to draw his own conclusions. The reporter of the survey indicated positives as well as negatives signs in the data, and certainly didn’t consider that the three main themes of the results in the alarming way that they have been summarised by Pipes. He says “the Pew survey sends an undeniable message of crisis from one end of the Muslim world to the other”. Which might be true, if he were prepared to acknowledge a little bit of balance in his report instead of turning it into a polemic.
What is frustrating about this is that Pew does substantial research, takes the time to analyse their data carefully and then it is transmitted to the national consciousness by someone who picks out the most alarming results while ignoring those that are reassuring. If we are talking about analysing why Muslim people feel isolated, perhaps this sort of reportage could be part of the reason?
June 28th, 2006 at 1:53 pm
interesting numbers, it is really encouraging to see that on the most part Muslim views of the world are coming closer to mine. Its also reassuring to see that simple facts like that wont stop people fear mongering and such
June 28th, 2006 at 4:58 pm
Would not it have just as easy to describe, until recently, the Christian community as “divided by conspiracy and hate”. Consider the Northern Ireland situation for example. Until recently much of the world’s terrorism was originated by Christian groups driven by hatred.
Hatred is a natural, if albeit undesireable, human emotion that is not limited to any religious group.
June 28th, 2006 at 5:04 pm
Sure that is an argument that could be advanced, but I doubt you will see this writer making that suggestion based on the way that he has presented the results of this survey.
June 29th, 2006 at 11:39 am
i hate stats but i am pretty sure that 50 % of all of us are below average
July 8th, 2006 at 2:01 am
I don’t think Muslims carried out the attacks either.
Oh, and Abtruth, if 3 people do a test, the first gets 0, another 50, and the third 100, then the average is 50. Only 33% is below average.
July 10th, 2006 at 12:30 pm
Daniel Pipes is a right wing commentator, so his articles are going to skew the numbers to consolidate opinion in favour of the neocon Bush administration and their ongoing agenda. After much research and consideration, and my initial reaction to the attacks, I don’t think it was Muslim terrorists either.
Interestingly, a fellow researcher of mine is currently analysing the media and reactions to Muslims in Australia, and she found that in her Muslim focus groups most people don’t believe it was AlQaida either. And, half of the ‘white’ Australians she spoke to agree.
My opinion is there was/is an underlying political (oil, US dominance) reasoning behind all this war on terror guff. I’m reading a very interesting book by Kevin Phillips called American Theocracy, which explains it all quite convincingly.
It’s all very Orwellian. You’d think it was 1984 for the new millennium.
October 11th, 2006 at 5:16 pm
Parents can think such stupid things.
When I was a teenager, I remember this raging argument and my mother stomping through the house, after learning that my older brother’s new girlfriend had played a role in ‘changing his religion’.
It turned out my brother had started going to a….gosh…. Uniting Church..instead of the Anglican church that our non-churchgoing non-Christian family went to for baptisms and weddings.
I get the strong impression that parents have the capacity to be even more stupid in Muslim families.
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,20560551-3102,00.html
“A RELIGIOUS feud between a Muslim father and his teenage daughter may have sparked a bloody domestic dispute on the Gold Coast which left the man’s wife dead and him fighting for life in hospital.
Police are investigating suggestions the violence erupted after the 17-year-old girl told her father she wanted to opt out of the Islamic faith and convert to Christianity. The girl’s mother is believed to have stepped in to protect her daughter, only to be fatally stabbed with a kitchen knife.”
October 11th, 2006 at 7:23 pm
There are many such horror stories Lance, which seem to be bypassed by the media: http://www.barnabasfund.org/archivenews/index.php
October 13th, 2006 at 3:27 pm
Jane - my understanding is that the Barnabas fund is pretty biased - a lot of their publications give me the impression that they ‘have it in’ for Muslims. Their focus on the persecution of Christians (not religious persecution - their mission is very specific) might not help this??
Lance, when I see articles like that, I can’t help but wonder whether that’s about Islam, or about culture. I’ve seen some extraordinary treatment of women in extremely Christianised cultures, and I’ve often wondered what would happen to some of these women if they converted to another belief system…
October 15th, 2006 at 9:00 pm
Bec you’re right re the barnbabas fund-check their own site for their conspiritorial approach to Islam (eg a demonstration outside the USA Embassy by a group of Muslims(and I have no doubt others) protesting at the the way the Koran was being abused in USA military prisons-Iraq and Guant. is seen as yet another step in the take over of Europe by Islam based on a doc written decades ago by a council of islam).And Bec when articles such as this one appear by Pipes,its not only about Islam and culture,its fundamenally about politics.Nothing wrong about that either,but like all good biblical exegesis the questions are who when and why was it written?
Michelle’s warning re Daniel Pipes is right on- one of the most active of neo cons which have the USA in the trouble they’re in in the Middle east.
And Lance(”parents are more stupid in Muslim families”):
.the Australian press regularly carries horrific stories of good white anglo saxon,Xn even,who abuse or kill their kids.
.Jewish vigilantes are kidnapping kids from mixed Israeli-Arab families(Daily Telegraph 8.10.06)
Lets not start from the basis of muslim,jewish or christian families,but the fact that at any point in time,somewhere, some families will screw up badly;and it generally has little to do with faith.
October 16th, 2006 at 8:59 am
Hi Bec & Alan,
I understand what you are both saying & it is certainly thought provoking.
Many people on this site have areas of Christ’s call that particularly move them - be it ministering to the poor & marginalised like Rev & yourself Bec, or the call for justice that is often mentioned. Possibly the thing that has moved me the most for over the last 20 years has been the persecution of our Christian brothers around the world, and whereas the main thrust used to be the suffering of those in communist regimes (still continuing)
- across all aid agencies, there is no doubt that it is those in Muslim countries that are suffering the most.
Yes, there are countless stories of so-called Christians alienating their brethren as you mentioned Bec. But you & I know that this is not the message of Christ, nor was it behaviour modelled by Christ. Political intrigue aside, I don’t think that there is any escaping the fact that one cannot convert from Islam, nor be a practising Christian in an Islamic country without facing some level of retribution. It is the intrinsic message modelled by their founder.
October 16th, 2006 at 1:10 pm
Jane…I think that if you’re going to assert that certain practices are “the intrinsic message modelled by their founder”, it’s essential to justify this. What practices, and how are they justified - and is are these theologies disputed at all? Bear in mind too that Mohammed is not the equivalent of Christ - my understanding (which is very limited) is that he is not said to be “perfect” in the sense that Christ is.
October 16th, 2006 at 6:15 pm
My understanding is pretty limited as well Bec, however it is interesting that in regards to Christian & jewish teachings, Muhammad “said that he had been sent by God in order to complete and perfect those teachings.” (http://sb.od.org/index.php?supp_page=wwl_explanation&supp_lang=en&PHPSESSID=e6ee8ec708f893f2da0dd4c220d28ace)
Anyway, to quote Open Doors research, in regards to the 2006 world watch list for countries with the worst Christian persecution: “Islam is the religion of the majority in five of the top ten countries: Saudi Arabia, Iran, Somalia, Maldives and Yemen. Four countries have communist governments: North Korea, Vietnam, Laos and China. Bhutan is the only Buddhist country in the ten highest countries on the list.” (http://sb.od.org/index.php?supp_page=wwl_explanation&supp_lang=en&PHPSESSID=e6ee8ec708f893f2da0dd4c220d28ace)
Having read heart breaking story after heart breaking story of Christians suffering in islamic states (or communist, but we are discussing the former) over the past couple of decades, are you saying that the common factor of islam is irrelevant & that every case of arrest, abuse, torture, etc has been an anomaly to that religion?
October 16th, 2006 at 7:20 pm
Jane -
in relation to your first paragraph, I simply do not know enough about Islam, however a Muslim friend of mine said to me the other day that the Prophet was thought to be perfect as far as matters of theology go, but not in relation to other things (ie ‘practice’). I don’t fully understand that, but I think it’s important to remember that the Prophet never claimed to be God - Christ did.
In relation to your second and third paragraphs - historically, Christians have a far worse record than Islam, but this does not mean that there is any *inherent* link between Christian thinking and persecution and oppression. Can Christians really forget the history of colonisation so quickly? Let us not forget the atrocities that have been committed to indigenous peoples throughout the world - atrocities that have been committed in the name of civilising and converting people to the one true faith! I say that colonisation was a distortion of the Gospel, that it was NOT what Christ was on about, that people’s reading of Christianity’s sacred texts was distorted by their culture, in particular their cultural imperialism and sense of superiority.
My Muslim friends would make similar claims about Islam.
I am not saying that “every case of arrest, abuse, torture etc” is an anomaly to Islam. I am saying that religion and culture interact - religions are mobilised to oppress vulnerable peoples just as they can be mobilised to be immense forces for good.
I just simply can’t point the finger at Muslims and claim that their religion is a greater source of oppression than is mine, when I hear heart-breaking story after heart-breaking story from friends who were members of the Stolen Generation…and this happened in the very region I grew up in. In fact, I have been told (though I have not ever tried to verify this) that people in my grandmother’s church, and the church just down the road that I grew up in, were amongst those that committed such acts, driven by their belief that they were doing God’s will. That’s your and my history, Jane - and this happened just outside my lifetime, and probably in yours. Not long before that, in my region and in many others throughout Australia, white men were running around with guns, exterminating indigenous people as they would dingoes…and they were all good Scottish and Irish men who’d rock up to church every Sunday morning.
Shall we start on the Melanesian women that were locked up in cages and treated like animals? Did you know Christianity arrived in Melanesia in the late 1800s? This ain’t recent history.
We could talk about South Africa’s history…or Germany’s…or Northern Ireland…yeah, us Christians have a great track record, there’s no blood on our hands…
October 17th, 2006 at 2:05 pm
Jane
Its sad old world we live in.It is true that Christians are suffering in some countries but its not always the fault of the communists or the muslims.Note the following rom the UK Sunday Tel of a few days ago 8.10.06
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/08/wisrael08.xml
(Vigilantes use force to reclaimmixed faith children for Israel:its a story of jewish vigilantes kidnapping children of mixed jewish/muslim marriages
October 18th, 2006 at 11:16 am
oh…and how could I forget the KKK?
Expanding the issue a bit, but there’s also Lynn White’s seminal essay, “On the Historical Roots of our Ecological Crisis”, which endeavours to show how Christianity, more than any other religion, is to blame for the ecological crisis. Again, I’d say White’s thesis is flawed on the basis that she conflates particular expressions of Christianity with the *inherent* nature of Christianity. There are various approaches to land and the natural environment in the Bible, some of them are more ‘green’ than others. While texts obviously represent ideologies and have consequences flowing from that, they are also subject to intepretation and application…and so blaming a religion, rather than the individuals that mobilise that religion to serve their interests, is missing the point. I don’t get to the luxury of saying “oh, uh…yeah, I’m really sorry I’m destroying the environment, but hey, Genesis says I should subdue the earth!!”
October 19th, 2006 at 10:50 am
Veritas has a good review of “Waging Peace on Islam”
http://lordveritas.blogspot.com/
October 20th, 2006 at 11:02 pm
*Sigh*. One day Christians, of all people, will learn the meaning of moral equivalence and how to avoid it like the plague.
OK the guy who wrote this was a Lutheran bishop, so forgive the protestant slant. But he was also a scholar of Islam, a formidable Christian theologian, a life long missionary - often under great trial - to the Pashtun in the North West Frontier of Pakistan (think Taliban tribe), still fondly remembered in the area around Mardan. Yet he drew more heavily from his lived experience of Islam rather than a mere academic presentation of it. Some fifty years ago, he wrote a series of lectures for missionaries in training, a series which, while aimed at missionaries, is still the most practical guide for a Christian to come to terms with Muslims and Islam that I know of. Here is his introductory lecture with my highlighting.
In fact if you read all of what he has to say, you would find that the first thing you have to do is to know who, what and why you yourself believe. But then, Christians of all traditions will tell you that.
October 21st, 2006 at 9:09 am
I only skim-read that, but it looks like a pretty good approach to me. Interestingly, I’ve heard one of my Muslim friends say many of the same things!!
October 22nd, 2006 at 3:19 am
Ah Bec, what I love about you is how you claim ignorance of Islam while simultaneously displaying your own ignorance about the history and influence of Christianity. Such multi tasking is only worthy of a woman.
For those who don’t skim read, I present to you, fear, self-loathing and moral equivalence by Bec (and just on this thread. Glory be!)
Where do you begin?
Psst, don’t anyone tell her about the Sunnah. Or ask which tradition her Muslim friend follows. And don’t laugh if they turned out to be Bahai.
Yep, lean not on your own understanding.
Yeah, next thing you will be telling me Hitler was a Christian and he’s my brother.
No it’s me who forgot it was the KKK who were the real Christians. As are the present occupiers of Cyprus, the genocidal maniacs in Dafur (yep that should be Saint Omar al-Bashir to you), let’s remember Saparmurat Niyazov, Seyed Ali Khamane’i and all the Iranian mullahs, our friends the Islamic Cuncil in Somalia, the Taliban in Aghanistan, our fearless Pakistani parliamentarians (Hudood ordnance anyone?), King Abdullah, Islam Karimov, Hu Jintao ..yes they too are all Christians holding their entire countries to ransom. So is Robert Mugabe, Kim Jong-il, Than Shwe, Teodoro Obiang Nguema, could I forget Osama and all his cronies, Abu Bashir and his band of merry men and gee I’ve only hit the top twenty or so BEST. CHRISTIANS. EVER. All present, living and unaccountable in Bec’s mind.
October 22nd, 2006 at 9:54 am
ummm…ouch. Saint, I’m interested in dialogue, not in being beaten up.
I don’t really know how to respond. Clearly you think I’m incredibly ignorant, so why don’t you expand on your comments. For example, why is it that us Christians can distance ourselves from the likes of the KKK by saying “well, they’re not real Christians”, but we can’t allow Muslims to do the same of suicide bombers?
As for the tirade you conclude with…man, I don’t know how to respond. Such conversations are for long dinner parties and good red wine; lazy afternoons lying in the sunshine in the botanical gardens…your post is so angry, so cruel, so full of venom…it’s a beautiful day outside, and I was looking forward to going to church and running the little prayer and sing-a-long with a group of people who live on the streets before we joined a big, free meal. I feel as if I should never have logged on to Signposts, because now I have tears running down my face, and instead of feeling the joy of Christ’s love, I am realising once again how full of hate, and competitiveness, and cruelty so many in our churches can be.
Thank you, Saint - you’ve truly shown me the love of Christ today. I hope that tirade made you feel better about yourself and the world around you.
October 22nd, 2006 at 9:59 am
For the record, Saint - the post above is not what I wanted to say, but it’s all I feel I can post on a public forum where somebody might dig something up and use it against me in the future.
Thankyou for ruining my day and making me cry. I truly hope that it gives you some satisfaction.
October 22nd, 2006 at 10:57 am
bec, i’ve stopped commenting here but this brought me back. your faith in grace, justice and redemption, and the God who brings them to life, keep inspiring me.
this was a vicious and nasty diatribe from Saint. my words won’t make that better. i just hope i can skew the picture a little back into the right direction.
October 22nd, 2006 at 11:29 am
Saint,
What on earth was the purpose of that diartribe? What extactly were you hoping for?
By all means disagree with Bec but really it is ironic that you are upset that Bec is not preaching the gospel to her Muslim friend by your standards, when you treat someone who disagrees with you like that.
I respect you Saint for the broard knowledge and understanding that you often bring to the discussions but in the case you have let yourself down badly.
I think you owe Bec an apology - not for disagreeing but for the way you disagreed.
October 22nd, 2006 at 2:24 pm
Bec… please know when someone goes so absolutely over the top it’s just not about you. (I had my long rant about transference on the “Respect” thread… becoming the focal point dumping ground for someone who’s really emotional about an issue… so I won’t go into it any more).
Let it go to the Keeper.
October 22nd, 2006 at 2:35 pm
Thanks for your lovely words Cheryl, Phil and Janet. I am feeling thankful for my gorgeous, wise housemate, the beautiful weather and cafes serving good coffee.
October 22nd, 2006 at 3:03 pm
What was that about, you asked?
It was a direct challenge, Phil.
Not angry, cruel, full of venom as Bec would have you believe. I am afraid that my world doesn’t revolve around her as much as she would want, not even to hate her.
The intention was not to make Bec go off and cry (for which I am sorry because that definitely was not my intention) but as I said in that comment, to ask Bec to support her thesis - a false hope it seems.
I was just looking for a bit of backbone amongst all that fluff.
Because her thesis in a way is a challenge to all Christians; it is, in a way a slap in the face of every Christian who has suffered for their faith, for no other reason than for being a Christian, to the point of shedding their blood. Hers is a challenge to God Himself, suggesting that He is so impotent and asleep at the wheel - unable to transform His people or achieve His purposes. Nope, all His followers do is wreak havoc on the planet. And this is how God manifests His glory.
I know why I can. Does Bec?
And it goes to more than just saying “they are not real Christians” or “they are not real Muslims” Even the KKK had to be opposed, exposed and brought to justice.
Indeed, is also very difficult for most Muslims to argue that say, Turkey should get out of Cyprus the way they argue about Westerners getting out of Iraq. Ask a Muslim how that “illegal invasion” or “occupation” is justified. Does Bec understand why?
It is impossible for any self-respecting Muslim to want nothing more than to bring Islamic rule to every nation on earth, by the sword even, and even if the majority being no more than nominally Muslims, just want the quiet life like the rest of us. Why? Because Dar al-Ilsam and Dar al-Harb is part of the warp and woof of Muslim teaching and self understanding.
In fact it is difficult to even be assured that any Muslim who tells you they want peace (if you think they understand peace the way say we do) is not lying to your face. Taqiyya anyone?
And is that an invitation to dinner or dawa?
It’s a problem, as pointed out by the excerpt I gave above, more so for Muslims than for anyone else. Because Muslims themselves have to struggle with a religion that even contradicts at times, their own humanity, and that asks them to applaud the death of their children.
Just as there is something (someone!) inherent to “Christianity” (if there is such a thing as “Christianity” but that’s another post) which predisposes Christians towards righteousness, grace, peace where “justice and mercy kiss each other” as the Psalmist said , a constant movement towards life, the consistent upholding of life -there is inherent to Islamic theology, not just its well-attested incoherences and contradictions but an intrinsic tendency towards subjugation, violence and death.
It is why you don’t get outrage and protests by Muslims on the street over a New York or a Bali or a Beslan or a Madrid or a London in the name of Islam (yes they were all real Muslims) and you get riots and protests over a cartoon drawn by a non-Muslim. And if you want to see a real moral dilemma for a Muslim, try the tragedy of Dafur for starters: Arab Muslim against Black Muslim. And want to see another moral dilemma for Bec: gays under Sharia.
I will also tell you why I call Bec’s attitude - and those with similar attitudes - fear and self-loathing.
I suspect Bec, like many (and yes do correct me here Bec) is not just afraid of being confronted for being a Christian, afraid that it will cost her in some way in a bit of time or emotion or inconvenience or whatever, but fears that one day she may be called to really trully suffer like Christ, unjustly, to the point of death. Indeed Muslims murdered a Christian boy in Iraq this week; they crucified him. Literally.
She fears, because she has not yet understood the power and grace of God much less His promise that he will never let her carry more than she can bear. So better to appease others - be they Muslims, Hindus, atheists, even other Christians - that she will bend over backwards for everyone, to the point of telling lies to herself and to others about our God; better to just apologize for things of which Christians are not culpable and forget all the true wrongs we have righted much less make any effort to address true injustices like the persecution of Christians abroard in the vain hope that maybe everyone will leave Bec alone and the big bad world will not impose on her red-wine soaked picnic Sunday afternoon. Too bad she forgets what that bread and wine signify.
Let’s spit on God’s name and on the name of the people of God, the countless faithful Christians and faithful Jews of old before us, who even if their names are unknown to us, are precious and known to Him. Let’s do it so that Bec doesn’t have to cry.
I suspect too that the self-loathing likewise comes from a false understanding of who God is and who He has made man to be. We may occasionally talk of the glory of God, but hardly anyone speaks of the glory of man. I suspect it is because of a false understanding of repentance and faith. True repentance is not self-pity, remorse, the sorrow that leads to death. Our faith is in God not in an abstract noun called “faith”. You get the picture. How a Christian, no matter how aware they are of their own sinfulness and neediness of God, can nevertheless wallow in such diatribe is beyond me - and I’m not talking just dipping our toe in as we are all wont to do when we get disheartened or doubtful - but the full on bath as demonstrated by Bec’s apologia on this thread to the point of making it a way of life: like Christ never came, the Cross didn’t happen, our hope is in nothing.
So Bec, I made you cry even if it was not my intention. But that you did says to me that you have not the courage of your convictions.
I will only apologise for the incoherence of this comment as I really have my mind on something else I am writing for work.
October 22nd, 2006 at 3:33 pm
I can see why you’re emotional about this issue Saint… the suffering many Christians endure is almost beyond belief… it’s something any normal person would be angry about.
That doesn’t mean a fellow Christian who doesn’t (yet or ever) see the world exactly the same way you do should be treated disrespectfully… I won’t cut and paste some of your more choice sarcastic phrases, but they do come across as venomous… have a re-read when you’ve finished your work. Imagine yourself the target of the comments.
Amongst other objections… I think when the line of respect gets crossed like this it seriously detracts from your argument. It’s very hard to even consider the evidence for what you’re saying because of your sarcastic embelishments, in my opinion.
October 22nd, 2006 at 4:07 pm
Ahh, a red-wine soaked picnic would have been nice today. Unfortunately I was actually stuck at home writing a research proposal. Which just demonstrates how little you know of me and how I live my life.
I cried because I *do* have the courage of my convictions. When I rang my housemate, I was crying because I cannot believe the verbal and physical violence that Christians dish out, cloaked in Christian labels. I cried because I realised - again - how much I would like to walk away from Christianity, were it not for Christ. I cried because I could not defend myself against your accusations, because to do so would require telling stories - my own, and those of others - in an environment in which they should not be told. I will not cheapen my stories, or those of others, by letting them be flung back and forth in order to prove whether or not I am a follower of Christ.
I also cried because when I read the things you have written, I hear the voices of all my friends who I do - in your words - “witness” to, and I hear their reasons for not being interested in Christianity. They say that they see none of this love, grace or redemption in Christians. They say that their experiences of Christianity are ones full of hurt, judgment, and pain. They express their respect for Christ, but say that they cannot reconcile this Christ with that they see in the church.
Saint, you are either a fool, or a liar - you do not write posts such as those you have written, full of the hate-fulled words you have written, and then say you didn’t want to hurt someone.
Saint, I feel it is you, rather than me, that has been spitting on Christ’s name. Your language is foul, violent, and revolting. I think that the language a person uses, and the metaphors they use, indicate what might be in their heart. I think there might be something in the Bible about that, but then again, I probably don’t read it enough to know for sure.
October 22nd, 2006 at 5:36 pm
Fair enough Janet, but if the objective reality doesn’t register with you then who cares about my sarcastic embellishments.
And Bec, if what I wrote you constitutes “verbal and physical violence” then frankly I understand why you don’t read the Bible enough: you’d positively have kittens over the OT prophets.
I never said I had “no intention of hurting you.” I said I had an intention to challenge you. And I am old enough to know that challenging someone will either make them uncomfortable, show them up to be a flake, bring it on, whatever. I knew full well what I was doing. And frankly am unsurprised that you are hyperventilating by telling me my words are hate-filled and violent. You wish in vain. Although I suspect some from the Religion of Perpetual Outrage TM could get lessons from you.
And isn’t it funny how those who cry for the misfits and the outcasts want tolerance blah, blah are quite incapable of dealing with all the messy individuals who don’t fit into their nice sanitized idea of life.
And just to tell you yet again: People will find every excuse under the sun to say why they are not a Christian, not to follow Him. Hec if you read that Bible of yours you might find that God has been dealing with humanity on that basis since Adam. Self-justification is part of fallen human nature. God’s self-revelation in Christ, however is how God gets to us.
Christ shows: see me see the Father.
Christ tests: who do you say that I am?
Jesus demands: follow me.
But no, in the gospel according to Bec:
Jesus: so Bec’s friend, what do you have to say for yourself? Why do you reject me?
Bec’s friend: oh I don’t see any grace in Christians. And boy do I have some stories to tell you about that. And really, Jesus, I am so much better than them, so much more deserving than them, that I shouldn’t have to put with them being part of your family.
Jesus: And you Bec, what do you have to say for yourself. Why do you reject me?
Bec: That saint character who comments at Signposts hurt my feelings. Oh and what my friend said.