Difference between revisions of "Opposition to Christianity"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(→‎China: add)
(→‎China: add India)
Line 15: Line 15:
 
==Britain==
 
==Britain==
 
In 19th century Britain the proportion of prominent people who maintained an anti-Christian materialist atheism was negligible, and a significant number of those who did embrace it were unsatisfied and returned to their religious beliefs. There was a a significant pattern among Victorian popular radicals: the regaining of their Christian faith. Arguments from design, the a priori ontological argument, and the ability of Christianity to offer a secure foundation for morality persuaded Victorian secularists to convert.<ref> Timothy  Larsen, "The Regaining of Faith: Reconversions among Popular Radicals in Mid-victorian England," ''Church History'' 2001 70(3): 527-543</ref>  
 
In 19th century Britain the proportion of prominent people who maintained an anti-Christian materialist atheism was negligible, and a significant number of those who did embrace it were unsatisfied and returned to their religious beliefs. There was a a significant pattern among Victorian popular radicals: the regaining of their Christian faith. Arguments from design, the a priori ontological argument, and the ability of Christianity to offer a secure foundation for morality persuaded Victorian secularists to convert.<ref> Timothy  Larsen, "The Regaining of Faith: Reconversions among Popular Radicals in Mid-victorian England," ''Church History'' 2001 70(3): 527-543</ref>  
−
==China==
+
==India==
 +
In [[India]] Christians have long faced the issue of their and national identity in terms of two dominant models of Indian nationalism. These are the liberal democratic model of an even-handed secular state (an idea which was presumed to have won out at independence in 1947) and the more recently enhanced model of Hindu nationalism - a view which is less accommodating and which sees little room for Muslims and Christians in a nation-state intent on promoting Hindu religious and cultural values. A small Indian Christian educated elite endorsed the aims of the Indian National Congress founded in 1885 and, having suffered from European control and dominance in the churches, appreciated all the more readily the need for a genuine partnership and collaboration between Indians and Europeans. While they argued that national regeneration would come only through the values associated with the Christian movement, they also had to demonstrate that Christianity itself was not specifically European and that Indian Christians had a genuine commitment to India and were not 'foreigners' alienated from their own culture. There were three basic phases in Christian relations with the nationalist movement: an early period of hope and enthusiasm, including the active involvement of Christians in the Indian National Congress; a phase of disillusionment, increasing suspicion, and withdrawal, largely in response to the rise of militant and anti-Christian Hindu nationalism; and a period of partial recovery encouraged by a growing disillusionment with the British, Gandhi's initial attitude and 'helpful' comments, and recognition that a Hindu-dominated regime was an inevitability. There were also three basic Indian Christian attitudes toward the nationalist struggle. The great majority of Christians appear to have been largely indifferent to the movement, being more concerned with local issues such as family, caste, and local church or mission affairs. Others were openly hostile. They believed that any benefits they had were the result of the work of European missionaries and that Hindu majority rule would undermine hard-won achievements - not the least of which was protection against discrimination. A third group, which included most of the Christian nationalists, felt that they had a great deal in common with moderate Hindus and that collaboration in the building of the new nation would not only ensure greater protection for Indian Christians but would benefit all parties concerned.<ref>Geoffrey A. Oddie, "Indian Christians and National Identity, 1870-1947," ''Journal of Religious History'' 2001 25(3): 346-366, in [[EBSCO]]. </ref>
  
 
== Examples ==
 
== Examples ==

Revision as of 23:16, December 19, 2009

Many individuals, groups, and even cultural movements in modern times are antichristian. This means they actively seek to attack, undermine, and denigrate Christians and the Christian faith, while deceiving the public about the nature of Christianity, its heritage, and accomplishments.

Characteristics

Antichristians dismiss the part that the Christian tradition played in the rapid development of European science, culture, and commerce, especially the scientific revolution. The also mock any and all Christians as being intellectually inferior, even if they are men of renowned intellectual or scientific ability, such as Francis Collins.

Africa

Intense battles -- often bloody pitched battles--pit Christians against Muslims in many African countries, especially Sudan and Nigeria.

United States

Tensions between Christians and Jews were eased with the adoption of the theme of a common "Judeo-Christian identity. Fundamentalist Protestants for theological reasons have emerged as the strongest supporters of Israel, which eased tensions somewhat between the Jewish community and Fundamentalists.

In 1989, Christian conservatives attempted to reframe the debate over the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and federal funding for the arts from waste to immorality by attacking grants for 'anti-Christian' and 'homoerotic' art. The Rev. Donald Wildmon of the American Family Association initiated the campaign against "Piss Christ and the NEA, warning that "the bias and bigotry against Christians, which has dominated television and movies for the last decade or more, has now moved over to the art museums". The Christian Coalition placed a full-page ad in the Washington Post warning Congress that taxpayers would punish them for "wasting their hard-earned money to promote sodomy, child pornography, and attacks on Jesus Christ. Patrick Buchanan warned that "America's art and culture are, more and more, openly anti-Christian, anti-American, nihilistic," and called for conservatives to lead "a cultural revolution". in a 1992 campaign commercial, Buchanan blamed the George H. W. Bush administration for funding "so-called art that has glorified homosexuality, exploited children and perverted the image of Jesus Christ".[1]

Secularism

Stressing their interpretation of the Separation of church and state, secularists have fought court battles to remove prayer from public schools, deny the nation's Christian heritage and outlaw the display of the Ten Commandments in courts of law, and even replace the term "Merry Christmas" with "Happy Holidays," to the chagrin of Bill O'Reilly.

Britain

In 19th century Britain the proportion of prominent people who maintained an anti-Christian materialist atheism was negligible, and a significant number of those who did embrace it were unsatisfied and returned to their religious beliefs. There was a a significant pattern among Victorian popular radicals: the regaining of their Christian faith. Arguments from design, the a priori ontological argument, and the ability of Christianity to offer a secure foundation for morality persuaded Victorian secularists to convert.[2]

India

In India Christians have long faced the issue of their and national identity in terms of two dominant models of Indian nationalism. These are the liberal democratic model of an even-handed secular state (an idea which was presumed to have won out at independence in 1947) and the more recently enhanced model of Hindu nationalism - a view which is less accommodating and which sees little room for Muslims and Christians in a nation-state intent on promoting Hindu religious and cultural values. A small Indian Christian educated elite endorsed the aims of the Indian National Congress founded in 1885 and, having suffered from European control and dominance in the churches, appreciated all the more readily the need for a genuine partnership and collaboration between Indians and Europeans. While they argued that national regeneration would come only through the values associated with the Christian movement, they also had to demonstrate that Christianity itself was not specifically European and that Indian Christians had a genuine commitment to India and were not 'foreigners' alienated from their own culture. There were three basic phases in Christian relations with the nationalist movement: an early period of hope and enthusiasm, including the active involvement of Christians in the Indian National Congress; a phase of disillusionment, increasing suspicion, and withdrawal, largely in response to the rise of militant and anti-Christian Hindu nationalism; and a period of partial recovery encouraged by a growing disillusionment with the British, Gandhi's initial attitude and 'helpful' comments, and recognition that a Hindu-dominated regime was an inevitability. There were also three basic Indian Christian attitudes toward the nationalist struggle. The great majority of Christians appear to have been largely indifferent to the movement, being more concerned with local issues such as family, caste, and local church or mission affairs. Others were openly hostile. They believed that any benefits they had were the result of the work of European missionaries and that Hindu majority rule would undermine hard-won achievements - not the least of which was protection against discrimination. A third group, which included most of the Christian nationalists, felt that they had a great deal in common with moderate Hindus and that collaboration in the building of the new nation would not only ensure greater protection for Indian Christians but would benefit all parties concerned.[3]

Examples

Antichristian groups include:

Infamous antichristians include:

External Links


References

  1. ↑ Richard Bolton, ed. Culture Wars: Documents from the Recent Controversies in the Arts (1992)
  2. ↑ Timothy Larsen, "The Regaining of Faith: Reconversions among Popular Radicals in Mid-victorian England," Church History 2001 70(3): 527-543
  3. ↑ Geoffrey A. Oddie, "Indian Christians and National Identity, 1870-1947," Journal of Religious History 2001 25(3): 346-366, in EBSCO.
  4. ↑ Freud's book "The Future of an Illusion" claimed to reduce Christianity to nothing more than an evolutionary step in religion.