Xianity vs Christianity

[fewwillfindit]

I am not sure if this is the proper subforum in which to be raising this issue, and I hope that I am not overstepping my bounds in doing so. I've noticed the term "Xian" being applied to Christians in various threads. It is not my intention to call out any specific individual or individuals.

I consider Xian to be a pejorative term, and I think that it is disrespectful. We do have a name by which we are called, and that is, "Christian." I am stating the obvious here, but the term means, "of Christ." We are not "of X," and we do not worship a Savior called X. We worship Christ.

To call it Xianity is to imply that the name of the One after Whom it is named isn't even worthy of mention. This also implies that He is just one of a plethora of various flavors of gods from which to choose, and ours just happens to be god-X. I understand that many promote the latter viewpoint, but Christians to not.

I would request that it become a forum-wide rule, that satirization of the names of various religions or non-religions that are represented on this forum should not be allowed, in light of the primary thrust of this forum, which is "civil and engaging debate."

After all, it would be disrespectful for theists to go around applying satirical monikers to non-theists. Instead, we call them non-theists, because that is what they choose to be called. I would ask for the same level of respect.

[fewwillfindit]

I'd agree if it was used pejoratively. But it is being used by educated people in "serious" discussion. "The Xian" I object to, as I do "The Athiest" when belligerent fundies use that term, because they are abstractions and generalizations.
But I can report from direct experience that the ordained professors at the following theology departments, seminaries, and divinity schools use the abbreviations Xian and Xty:
- Yale
- Boston College
- Boston University
- Fairfield University
- Episcopal Divinity School
- Andover Newton Theological
- Weston Jesuit
- Harvard
- The New Seminary

And I can report based on readings and speaking and corresponding with grads that it is common practice in every other school of this nature (e.g. top quality). It's just an abbreviation used by pros in the trade.

So now that folks here know this, I intend to use it all the time as a convenience. NEVER as an insult. EVER.

In light of this, combined with the weight of your credentials and those of Charles, I officially admit that I was wrong. Although I was aware of its historical significance, I was unaware, prior to this thread, that it was still used in modern times by Christians. Personally, the only time that I recall seeing it used is by strong opponents of Christianity, but that is no excuse.

My apologies to everyone, and that includes Ooberman.

[Slopeshoulder]

I'd agree if it was used pejoratively. But it is being used by educated people in "serious" discussion. "The Xian" I object to, as I do "The Athiest" when belligerent fundies use that term, because they are abstractions and generalizations.
But I can report from direct experience that the ordained professors at the following theology departments, seminaries, and divinity schools use the abbreviations Xian and Xty:
- Yale
- Boston College
- Boston University
- Fairfield University
- Episcopal Divinity School
- Andover Newton Theological
- Weston Jesuit
- Harvard
- The New Seminary

And I can report based on readings and speaking and corresponding with grads that it is common practice in every other school of this nature (e.g. top quality). It's just an abbreviation used by pros in the trade.

So now that folks here know this, I intend to use it all the time as a convenience. NEVER as an insult. EVER.

In light of this, combined with the weight of your credentials and those of Charles, I officially admit that I was wrong. Although I was aware of its historical significance, I was unaware, prior to this thread, that it was still used in modern times by Christians. Personally, the only time that I recall seeing it used is by strong opponents of Christianity, but that is no excuse.

My apologies to everyone, and that includes Ooberman.

Respect to you.
But you are right to jump on anyone who uses pejorative terms.
Intent is everything.

[Ooberman]

So, the rule is, if an Atheist says it, it MUST be pejorative because they are evil and there is none that does good... How rude of those atheists!

BTW, for the record, when I type out "Christian" I mean it in the most insulting way I can ever imagine. When I type "Xian" I mean a person who claims to follow the religion based on Jesus of Nazareth. Chew on that for a while!

[fewwillfindit]

BTW, for the record, when I type out "Christian" I mean it in the most insulting way I can ever imagine.

When I type out "Atheist" or "non-Theist," I mean it in the most respectful way possible. I do not harbor resentment toward you, Ooberman.

[Ooberman]

BTW, for the record, when I type out "Christian" I mean it in the most insulting way I can ever imagine.

When I type out "Atheist" or "non-Theist," I mean it in the most respectful way possible. I do not harbor resentment toward you, Ooberman.

That's awfully kind of you, even though you worship a Being that you feel is totally justified in torturing me forever. I'd rather have you hate a tortuous Being, or me, then love both of us.


Anyhow, I was trying to make a point, since people keep claiming it is about intent, but why if the Atheist writes "Xian" is has an intent? My only intent is to save time. A side result is that it reveals the many Xians who have fragile ego's and don't know the history of their religion; who use it as something to feel persecuted because, frankly, their lives are comfy and secure because they were born (read: God granted them a life of comfort as opposed to being born with AIDS to a starving mother in Africa) in a 1st world nation.

That is my belief. Can anyone disprove it? That the people who are offended by the term "Xian" are really just spoiled, Western, 1st world brats who think their level of persecution is to be compared to Jesus' or some other Xian in history?

See how assumptions can really skew the conversation? So, if you don't want me to think that about you, maybe people shouldn't assume "xian" is some sign of an intent to insult.

If I intend to insult people, I hope it is crystal clear, not hiding behind a differently spelled word!

[fewwillfindit]

BTW, for the record, when I type out "Christian" I mean it in the most insulting way I can ever imagine.

When I type out "Atheist" or "non-Theist," I mean it in the most respectful way possible. I do not harbor resentment toward you, Ooberman.

That's awfully kind of you, even though you worship a Being that you feel is totally justified in torturing me forever. I'd rather have you hate a tortuous Being, or me, then love both of us.


Anyhow, I was trying to make a point, since people keep claiming it is about intent, but why if the Atheist writes "Xian" is has an intent? My only intent is to save time. A side result is that it reveals the many Xians who have fragile ego's and don't know the history of their religion; who use it as something to feel persecuted because, frankly, their lives are comfy and secure because they were born (read: God granted them a life of comfort as opposed to being born with AIDS to a starving mother in Africa) in a 1st world nation.

That is my belief. Can anyone disprove it? That the people who are offended by the term "Xian" are really just spoiled, Western, 1st world brats who think their level of persecution is to be compared to Jesus' or some other Xian in history?

See how assumptions can really skew the conversation? So, if you don't want me to think that about you, maybe people shouldn't assume "xian" is some sign of an intent to insult.

If I intend to insult people, I hope it is crystal clear, not hiding behind a differently spelled word!

If that is what you think of me, a spoiled Western brat with a persecution complex, then you haven't carefully read this thread. Please reread what I have already said regarding past and present persecutions in Christian history. After reading it, read it again. This is such a diametrically opposed mischaracterization of me that I am truly speechless.

What is the point in resurrecting this thread that seems to have been already settled, complete with my apology to you, after three weeks of inactivity?

[Ooberman]

I don't think you are, but just like you mischaracterized my intent to insult by using "xian", it would be wrong to characterize you of what you said if it were because of my attempt to see some hidden intent or sign.

I haven't been clear.

This is my point: it is not right to think that atheists who use "xian" are trying to insult people. That is all.

[fewwillfindit]

You have a real knack for missing the point. I don't think you are - and that you certainly wouldn't admit to it if you were, but just like you mischaracterize my intent to insult by using "xian", it would be wrong to characterize me of what I said.

I haven't been clear. This is my point: it is not right to think that atheists who use "xian" are trying to insult people. That is all. I was trying to use an extreme example to make the point. I am sorry.

I'm driving right now, so I can't go back and grab all the quotes, but it seems as though you are ignoring the contents of this thread and its progression from beginning to end. I believe that we've already settled all that. I will ask again: why did you resurrect this thread, after it had already been settled, complete with my apology to you, after three weeks of inactivity?

Is it your intention to start the argument anew, ignoring the many pages of replies that have already been offered?

[Ooberman]

I sincerely apologize for bringing up what was a long, drawn out and ugly - but perhaps informative - discussion. I was simply responding to Slopeshoulder's post in reference to the OP: that the idea of intent should be considered. I indelicately tried to make the point - contrary to the OP - that just because an atheist uses "xian" it doesn't mean they had the intent of insulting Christians.

I was trying to be ironic by saying that when I typed "Christian" that I was trying to be insulting - thereby making the the whole endeavor silly - or, rather, that was my intent.

I DO NOT MEAN TO BE INSULTING WHEN I TYPE "XIAN" OR "CHRISTIAN". I hope my insults are obvious, when I make them. I don' think snide attempts of insults via mis-spelling is worthy of my vast intellect! <<joke For example, I will never purposely misspell a person name to make it into something rude or insulting. I honor the person in my own way by honoring their name. For example, ooberman becomes gooberman, or something.


I appreciated your apology and in no way mean to make you feel it was for nothing. Again, I was responding to slopeshoulders response in the context of the OP. And I hold no ill will toward slopeshoulder.