Why Are There So Many Whiney and Hypersensitive Christians Today?

[JoLonda]

When chatting with self proclaimed Christians today, it is very common to inadvertently hurt their feelings by saying something which they feel uncomfortable with. And they react so strongly, as if their lives are being threatened.

I am thinking that such little people have not yet learned the difference between words and actions. Perhaps it is from faithfully attending so many church services, where only words and talk are presented. Such a constant authoritative verbal input may cause them to unknowingly live in a world of words, where any perceived verbal threat is thought by them to be a material threat.

Of course, maybe such little people are just made by God to be weak and always afraid, in need of guidance and protection.

JoLonda.

[Meh_Gerbil]

When chatting with self proclaimed Christians today, it is very common to inadvertently hurt their feelings by saying something which they feel uncomfortable with. And they react so strongly, as if their lives are being threatened.

I am thinking that such little people have not yet learned the difference between words and actions. Perhaps it is from faithfully attending so many church services, where only words and talk are presented. Such a constant authoritative verbal input may cause them to unknowingly live in a world of words, where any perceived verbal threat is thought by them to be a material threat.

Of course, maybe such little people are just made by God to be weak and always afraid, in need of guidance and protection.

JoLonda.

Perhaps it would be more instructive to review your need to say things that offend other people.

[technomage]

When chatting with self proclaimed Christians today, it is very common to inadvertently hurt their feelings by saying something which they feel uncomfortable with. And they react so strongly, as if their lives are being threatened.

I am thinking that such little people have not yet learned the difference between words and actions. Perhaps it is from faithfully attending so many church services, where only words and talk are presented. Such a constant authoritative verbal input may cause them to unknowingly live in a world of words, where any perceived verbal threat is thought by them to be a material threat.

Of course, maybe such little people are just made by God to be weak and always afraid, in need of guidance and protection.

JoLonda.

Hmmm. Is it possible that those who react reasonably make less of an impression on our memory, and those who pitch a fit make a greater impression?

[Trout]

Why are there so many, songs about rainbows and what's on the other side?

[Spinyn00bman]

When chatting with self proclaimed Christians today, it is very common to inadvertently hurt their feelings by saying something which they feel uncomfortable with. And they react so strongly, as if their lives are being threatened.

I am thinking that such little people have not yet learned the difference between words and actions. Perhaps it is from faithfully attending so many church services, where only words and talk are presented. Such a constant authoritative verbal input may cause them to unknowingly live in a world of words, where any perceived verbal threat is thought by them to be a material threat.

Of course, maybe such little people are just made by God to be weak and always afraid, in need of guidance and protection.

JoLonda.

Uh....Pot meet Kettle.

[cardiakeifi]

...Of course, maybe such little people are just made by God to be weak and always afraid, in need of guidance and protection...

JoLonda.

JoLonda, you answered you own question... Fear. Then again, fear can bring out that reaction in most people, no matter what path they follow. Fear weakens, and when people feel weak, they lash out towards that which makes them feel that way. Examples would be like anger, intolerance or just being judgemental.

Peace, Love and laughter,
Keifi

[JoLonda]

Perhaps it would be more instructive to review your need to say things that offend other people.

So, start your own thread on that. Is anything stopping you?

JoLonda.

[JoLonda]

Hmmm. Is it possible that those who react reasonably make less of an impression on our memory, and those who pitch a fit make a greater impression?

Is that so with you?

Jolonda.

[JoLonda]

JoLonda, you answered you own question... Fear. Then again, fear can bring out that reaction in most people, no matter what path they follow. Fear weakens, and when people feel weak, they lash out towards that which makes them feel that way. Examples would be like anger, intolerance or just being judgemental.

Peace, Love and laughter,
Keifi

Jesus was judgmental, but He never feared.

Why would anyone in His Kingdom need to fear?

Are not the pieces of Spiritual armor described in Scripture sufficient by which Christians are to find freedom from fear?

Why would a person calling themself a Christian run from perceived threats into their own emotional resources?

Would Professional Church Talk perhaps help them by informing them of "Their Identity in Christ?"

JoLonda.

[technomage]

Is that so with you?

Frequently it is--I read someone I agree with, and I may nod and go to the next post. If I read a post that startles me, or that I disagree with, it causes emotional upset; perhaps merely disagreement or perhaps anger.

But I must wonder if it is a Christian trait, or if it is a human trait. I've seen similar behavior on Wiccan and Pagan forums, on Islamic forums, and on atheist forums. Perhaps it is simply that many people do not like having their ideas challenged.

[Spinyn00bman]

Uh....Pot meet Kettle.

Well Jolonda???

[Augusta]

JoLonda, you answered you own question... Fear. Then again, fear can bring out that reaction in most people, no matter what path they follow. Fear weakens, and when people feel weak, they lash out towards that which makes them feel that way. Examples would be like anger, intolerance or just being judgemental.

Peace, Love and laughter,
Keifi
Very good point. Fear and anger are often very closely connected. Anger comes across as a "strong" emotion; however it's roots are often the weakness caused by fear (or the fear due to weakness).

[JoLonda]

Frequently it is--I read someone I agree with, and I may nod and go to the next post. If I read a post that startles me, or that I disagree with, it causes emotional upset; perhaps merely disagreement or perhaps anger.

But I must wonder if it is a Christian trait, or if it is a human trait. I've seen similar behavior on Wiccan and Pagan forums, on Islamic forums, and on atheist forums. Perhaps it is simply that many people do not like having their ideas challenged.

I have been under the assumption that information within Scriptural Christian ideology and the power of the Spirit of God helps Christians to unnaturally be elevated above the petty gut reactions of Wiccan, Islamic, Pagan, and atheist adherents.

Matthew 5:16 (KJV) says, "Let your light shine before men, so that they may see your good works, and glorify your father which is in heaven."

Whiney hypersensitivity is not part of light. Jesus was not thin skinned. There should be an observable trend in Christians at large for a distinguishment between Christians and the emotionally and spiritually lost.

JoLonda.

[Pilgrim]

Jesus was judgmental, but He never feared.

Why would anyone in His Kingdom need to fear?

Are not the pieces of Spiritual armor described in Scripture sufficient by which Christians are to find freedom from fear?

Why would a person calling themself a Christian run from perceived threats into their own emotional resources?

Would Professional Church Talk perhaps help them by informing them of "Their Identity in Christ?"

JoLonda.
That's a good post. And in response to the last question: It might, depending on who is giving the talk and where their authority is coming from. ie. are the preaching self help or are the preaching the gospel?

[technomage]

I have been under the assumption that information within Scriptural Christian ideology and the power of the Spirit of God helps Christians to unnaturally be elevated above the petty gut reactions of Wiccan, Islamic, Pagan, and atheist adherents.

Matthew 5:16 (KJV) says, "Let your light shine before men, so that they may see your good works, and glorify your father which is in heaven."

Whiney hypersensitivity is not part of light. Jesus was not thin skinned. There should be an observable trend in Christians at large for a distinguishment between Christians and the emotionally and spiritually lost.

Nothing that I'm aware of in the Bible gives such a guarantee ... indeed, Paul comments that even as a Christian, he is still subject to the "law of sin at work within my members." Rom 7:14-23 is illuminative of the difference between what we should do, and what we frequently end up doing.

It would certainly be a better world if Christians were discernably different in their behavior ... but I fear that the passage you quote tells Christians what they should do. We have to look to the passage in Romans to understand why we do not always succeed.

[Beanieboy]

All people are different.

I've said things that were jokes to christians and nons, and have the reaction of "WHAT'S THAT SUPPOSED TO MEAN???"

Some people are more sensitive than others. Respect that.

But it is also true that some people are more abrasive.
One can say to another, "You are a big fat idiot" and think that's acceptable, and nonoffensive.

If you really care, examine yourself, and find a better way to communicate.

I think there are areas where you shouldn't tread, like, "you don't believe in praying to mary, so you aren't a real christian and going to hell!!!"
Not only is that offensive, but none of us should ever think that we will be sitting on some throne of judgement.

However, without a clear example, this is about all I can say.

[JoLonda]

All people are different.

I've said things that were jokes to christians and nons, and have the reaction of "WHAT'S THAT SUPPOSED TO MEAN???"

Some people are more sensitive than others. Respect that.

But it is also true that some people are more abrasive.
One can say to another, "You are a big fat idiot" and think that's acceptable, and nonoffensive.

If you really care, examine yourself, and find a better way to communicate.

I think there are areas where you shouldn't tread, like, "you don't believe in praying to mary, so you aren't a real christian and going to hell!!!"
Not only is that offensive, but none of us should ever think that we will be sitting on some throne of judgement.

However, without a clear example, this is about all I can say.

Beanieboy,

Scripture does say we are to judge things, and assess fellow Believers' actions.

JoLonda.

[Rahab]

When chatting with self proclaimed Christians today, it is very common to inadvertently hurt their feelings by saying something which they feel uncomfortable with. And they react so strongly, as if their lives are being threatened. Bonjour Jolonda,

I will assume that your observations concern mainly cyber communication. Which, I try to remind myself, can lead me to have high expectations of others as such communication does not equip me with the knowlege of their life circumstances. IOW, we do not know to which extent any provoking or thought challenging remarks, we make, may be the "straw on the camel's back".

.I am thinking that such little people have not yet learned the difference between words and actions. Perhaps it is from faithfully attending so many church services, where only words and talk are presented. Such a constant authoritative verbal input may cause them to unknowingly live in a world of words, where any perceived verbal threat is thought by them to be a material threat. That is an interesting analysis.And since cyber communication is a "world of words", there may be some type of conditionned response to verbal provocation. However, once you have determined that you are dealing with what you refer to as "little people", should you exploit whichever advantage you believe to have and watch them "shrink" by pushing their emotional buttons or consider the edifying aspect of reassuring them?

Let's try to keep in mind that as you make someone feel appreciated by you, you are clarifying your intentions and giving them a sense of validation.

Let's assume that you distinguish yourself as someone who does not percieve "verbal threats" as "material threats", should not your contribution to the "little people" be to share your strength with them rather than exploiting whichever weakness you detect in them? That is, of course, dependent on your personal willingness to build bridges rather than burning them. Dependent also on how you yourself engage in such communication and if you consider that you may have something to learn from the percieved "little people".

.Of course, maybe such little people are just made by God to be weak and always afraid, in need of guidance and protection.

JoLonda. Considering that believers are represented metaphoricaly as "sheep", no doubt that we are portrayed as vulnerable. No doubt that sheep requires protection and guidance.

The weakness of the sheep ,transposed on our species, is how we can be emotionaly dispersed and confused when dealing with difficult circumstances.How the social animals we are suffer when isolated from their kind. How we do not necessarely carry one another thru troubled times. How we are hesitant to delay our own agenda to wait for the "weaker" to catch up with us. Or even slow down and look behind in case we are abandonning a wounded member of our species.

The shepherd then intervenes to fulfill what sheep fails to do. He will slow down the herd so that the lambs can keep up. He will carry the wounded. He will become the focal point when the sheep disperses and wanders off as a thunderstorm threatens. When night has come or a thick fog develops, the thumping of his staff on the ground sends the signal to the herd as to which way to go.Again, the focal point is the shepherd.

Our humanity implies weakness, JoLonda. We all identify thru our weaknesses.The main issue is to not be in touch with our own humanity. To deny that we all undergo a process of growth. For some, the focal point is God. For others,they rely on their own inner source of protection and guidance.

Our own instinct of survival is what drives us to establish a source of protection.Our inability to acquire knowlege of all things and apply it to any given circumstances is what drives us to establish a source of guidance. Fear needs not to be in that equation.

There is no wiser man than one who has recognized his weaknesses, has established sources of protection and guidance, to be able to survive from them.

Maybe the folks you refered to as "little people" are simply folks who do not know themselves.

[JoLonda]

Nothing that I'm aware of in the Bible gives such a guarantee ... indeed, Paul comments that even as a Christian, he is still subject to the "law of sin at work within my members." Rom 7:14-23 is illuminative of the difference between what we should do, and what we frequently end up doing.

It would certainly be a better world if Christians were discernably different in their behavior ... but I fear that the passage you quote tells Christians what they should do. We have to look to the passage in Romans to understand why we do not always succeed.


Would you like to be aware of Psalm 119:11, "Your Word have I hidden in my heart that I might not sin against Thee."?

JoLonda.

[technomage]

Would you like to be aware of Psalm 119:11, "Your Word have I hidden in my heart that I might not sin against Thee."?

I am aware of that passage, dear friend, and I take it as not only a great comfort in trying times, but as practical advice on how to fight against the "law of sin in my members." But even here, we have no promise that we will be free of sin in this life. We will not always win in that fight, because we are trapped between the law of sin in our flesh, and the law of Christ in our hearts.

But such should never be taken as an excuse: we should never say "Well, I cannot win the battle against sin every day, so I might as well not even try." We must continually fight against the law of sin in our members.

[JoLonda]

Bonjour Jolonda,

I will assume that your observations concern mainly cyber communication. Which, I try to remind myself, can lead me to have high expectations of others as such communication does not equip me with the knowlege of their life circumstances. IOW, we do not know to which extent any provoking or thought challenging remarks, we make, may be the "straw on the camel's back".

. That is an interesting analysis.And since cyber communication is a "world of words", there may be some type of conditionned response to verbal provocation. However, once you have determined that you are dealing with what you refer to as "little people", should you exploit whichever advantage you believe to have and watch them "shrink" by pushing their emotional buttons or consider the edifying aspect of reassuring them?

Let's try to keep in mind that as you make someone feel appreciated by you, you are clarifying your intentions and giving them a sense of validation.

Let's assume that you distinguish yourself as someone who does not percieve "verbal threats" as "material threats", should not your contribution to the "little people" be to share your strength with them rather than exploiting whichever weakness you detect in them? That is, of course, dependent on your personal willingness to build bridges rather than burning them. Dependent also on how you yourself engage in such communication and if you consider that you may have something to learn from the percieved "little people".

. Considering that believers are represented metaphoricaly as "sheep", no doubt that we are portrayed as vulnerable. No doubt that sheep requires protection and guidance.

The weakness of the sheep ,transposed on our species, is how we can be emotionaly dispersed and confused when dealing with difficult circumstances.How the social animals we are suffer when isolated from their kind. How we do not necessarely carry one another thru troubled times. How we are hesitant to delay our own agenda to wait for the "weaker" to catch up with us. Or even slow down and look behind in case we are abandonning a wounded member of our species.

The shepherd then intervenes to fulfill what sheep fails to do. He will slow down the herd so that the lambs can keep up. He will carry the wounded. He will become the focal point when the sheep disperses and wanders off as a thunderstorm threatens. When night has come or a thick fog develops, the thumping of his staff on the ground sends the signal to the herd as to which way to go.Again, the focal point is the shepherd.

Our humanity implies weakness, JoLonda. We all identify thru our weaknesses.The main issue is to not be in touch with our own humanity. To deny that we all undergo a process of growth. For some, the focal point is God. For others,they rely on their own inner source of protection and guidance.

Our own instinct of survival is what drives us to establish a source of protection.Our inability to acquire knowlege of all things and apply it to any given circumstances is what drives us to establish a source of guidance. Fear needs not to be in that equation.

There is no wiser man than one who has recognized his weaknesses, has established sources of protection and guidance, to be able to survive from them.

Maybe the folks you refered to as "little people" are simply folks who do not know themselves.

Let's assume you know what you are talking about. How have you "Delayed your agenda to let the weaker ones catch up?"

Have you discovered that imagining an explanation of an issue is most likely far removed from the facts of reality? Such use of human imagination is commonly called fiction, or fairy tales.

Our humanity implies arrogance, Rahab, seen when self appointed people condescend to others by using large and expansive pronouns such as "We," and "Let's," and "Our." Have you spoken to a few million people, seeing into their souls, in order to authoritatively state "We all identify through our weakness?" Or, have you stretched Scripture to generate that feeling in yourself?

A wise person once said, "It is a fine man who recognizes the dangers and presumptuousness of being a Church Talker showing no deeds, living in a world of words and ideas."

JoLonda.

[Rahab]

Let's assume you know what you are talking about. How have you "Delayed your agenda to let the weaker ones catch up?".

Bonjour Jolonda,

There are many opportunities on a daily basis to delay one's agenda. We can choose to adopt an attitude of disdain towards the new co worker while pursuing a competitive goal. We can also choose to welcome such co worker, introduce him/her to a new environment and guide him/her to their potential.

We can make someone feel like a total failure when they attempt to communicate with us in our native language or show appreciation for their efforts and facilitate their integration in a foreign environment. We can push a plate away from us fixed by a hostess who attempted to impress us with some exotic meal or honor her efforts and make her feel appreciated. The agenda not being to benefit of a meal anylonger but to validate the efforts of the other person.

There is not a day we do not have an opportunity to slow down our agenda (usualy self centered) and consider validating others no matter how " little" we percieve them.

Since your OP was targeting folks in the context of cyber communication, we can delay our agenda of affirming how absolutly right we are and attempt to establish what we may share in common. We can choose to "meet the other person half way" or remain contentious and argue ad nauseum just because we never want to say" I may be wrong". We can engage in participation in a forum for the sole purpose of provoking and pushing buttons or genuinely seek a dialogue where modifying our views is not out of question. We can nit pick on the grammatical and semantical downfalls of the percieved "adversary" or acknowlege the various degrees of education of each.

In general, if we can set our ego centered agenda aside for a moment, we have given our communication a better chance to be recieved.


.Have you discovered that imagining an explanation of an issue is most likely far removed from the facts of reality? Such use of human imagination is commonly called fiction, or fairy tales.

Yes, I have. However, I do not have any issue with people establishing a strategy of a source of guidance and protection(to use your own words i.e guidance and protection) based on fiction as long as it has helped them be a "better version of themselves". To apply a metaphysical explanation to an issue IMO can be profoundly productive if we consider that the material to work on is ourselves rather than attempting to control the rest of mankind. Some will retain Christ as their focal point to improve themselves and as a motivation and inspiration to interact productively and compassionately with fellow human beings. Others, undoubtly, retain Christ as a focal point to make others conformed to their own copyright on character and morality.

It has to do with control over whomever is different from you. Have you considered that as you may challenge the "little people", you are challenging conformism to their beliefs and removing them from the "safety" zone of organized religion, with an established denominational label, titles, authority symbols etc.....you are in fact placing them in the position of refusing to be controlled by them. For a lot of folks, control over others is what gives them a sense of safety.

.Our humanity implies arrogance, Rahab, seen when self appointed people condescend to others by using large and expansive pronouns such as "We," and "Let's," and "Our.". You can always choose an alternative to your initial interpretation of my use of the pronoun "we". It requires of course the effort to not attribute the worst intentions to the writer. But again, that is a choice you make. It seems to depend on what pre set state of mind you may have as you attribute intentions. A negative one will undoubtly lead you to infer whichever fault you will to find in anyone.

. Have you spoken to a few million people, seeing into their souls, in order to authoritatively state "We all identify through our weakness?" Or, have you stretched Scripture to generate that feeling in yourself?.

Considering that a "soul" is an abstract concept, I am not sure how many people would use that argument to support the statement I made "We all identify thru our weaknesses". So let me explain which angle I am coming from: life experience. Relationships and rapports with other members of my species. The repeated occurence of my opening up about my own humanity which triggers a sense of trust that I am equiped to recieve favorably and with empathy their own sharing IRW their humanity. We then identify with one and other. We acknowlege our commoness.Equaly, other members of my species have shared openly their humanity with me triggering in me a sense that I can entrust them to recieve mine with empathy rather than disdain.

Let me use a reality based example of the productivity of the "empathy" rapport:

Support groups such as AA rely on the experience of the recovered alcoholic sponsor who has admitted and recognized all the struggles (psychological and physical) involved with the recovery process. That experience is what enables such sponsor to identify with the struggles of any alcoholic. Thus equipping him or her to respond with empathy rather than disdain or indifference.

Since you brought up "fear" IRW the "little people", an honest introspection of your own person may lead you to relate and identify to the defensive process which occurs each time any of us is confronted by a percieved opponant who questions the validity of our very individuality. Certainly, you are not above and beyong that process or do you think you are?

The question I have asked you in my previous post remains a challenge for you to examine and answer to:

Which of the two responses to the "little people" is productive: rubbing their nose into their "fear and weakness" while you can pat yourself on the back as to your own percieved immunity to feeling threatened or guide them gently into a safe zone with you so that a dialogue can be established?

As far as scriptures is concerned, long before I had any exposure to a spiritual path, my natural encline was to relate as intimately as possible to the emotions of other folks. Do not be misguided by the notion that all christians check out at the gates of their faith whichever they experienced in their upbringing, experiences which often have led them to compensate in adulthood for what they lacked in their childhood.

Since this is the psychology forum, we might as well acknowlege the aspect of all the factors which contribute to people responding emotionaly one way or the other. Factors I will remind you, neither you or I have any knowlege of as we communicate with one another in a cyber context. You have your own baggage as I have mine.

.A wise person once said, "It is a fine man who recognizes the dangers and presumptuousness of being a Church Talker showing no deeds, living in a world of words and ideas."

JoLonda.

I suppose that would not apply to any mind who has lived in a world of words and ideas which have been a source of motivation and inspiration to his/her peers. I can think of many writers and philosophers who contributed to the intellectual empowerment of mankind without being involved into a humanitarian action. I certainly will not be critical of their choice of interaction as I recognize their roles as motivators.

What you are pointing to is what we commonly refer to as the difference between "walking the talk" and not walking the talk. However, I certainly will not dismiss the number of christians who do walk the talk because I happen to be exposed to a majority who does not. It is that minority I choose to be edified by and with. Again, it is a matter of which state of mind one has.

I would apply the same principle to any group, religious or not. But my responsibility is to seek to view and percieve others with the greatest degree possible of giving the benefit of the doubt. That is not without great struggle.

IMO we become more secure in whichever convictions we favor the moment we make the conscious choice to not percieve others as the "enemy".

There is definitly one christian centered theme I have expanded from for myself to be motivated to attribute the best intentions and resist the negative drive to infer the worst: make my thoughts captive of Christ. That captivity implies applying positive thinking. It implies bonding with others and finding the commoness. It implies setting aside ego centered responses. It implies adding water to the well rather than oil on the fire. But to come to that point, I had to acknowlege which thoughts were detrimental to me. Then I realized that the rest of my existence is to be a choice of how I will think. Considering that consciousness crisis occured some 15 years ago when I was in my mid thirties, I often feel that I have a lot to modify.

Words can heal. Words can wound. The choice is always ours to make.

[JoLonda]

I am aware of that passage, dear friend, and I take it as not only a great comfort in trying times, but as practical advice on how to fight against the "law of sin in my members." But even here, we have no promise that we will be free of sin in this life. We will not always win in that fight, because we are trapped between the law of sin in our flesh, and the law of Christ in our hearts.

But such should never be taken as an excuse: we should never say "Well, I cannot win the battle against sin every day, so I might as well not even try." We must continually fight against the law of sin in our members.

A Cup, Lil' Cupcake,

It sounds like you think it is a good idea to provide excuses for immaturity and negligence, calling them reasons and explanations.

I am sure that is the "Nice" thing to do. But it helps nobody. Rather, Cupcake, it enables people to keep being foolish and unproductive people in God's Kingdom.

Now, we do not want that to happen, do we?

JoLonda.

[Cello]

Very good point. Fear and anger are often very closely connected. Anger comes across as a "strong" emotion; however it's roots are often the weakness caused by fear (or the fear due to weakness).

I very much agree. I heard a speaker one time and I can't recall exactly how it was related but it was summed up that in essence...MOST of sin stems from fear. (Not that anger is always sin...)

We are afraid, afraid of not being in control, afraid of appearing foolish, afraid of the unknown, afraid to trust.....etc etc and it can be exhibited as many different things - pride, anger, self reliance. etc.

[JoLonda]

Bonjour Jolonda,

There are many opportunities on a daily basis to delay one's agenda. We can choose to adopt an attitude of disdain towards the new co worker while pursuing a competitive goal. We can also choose to welcome such co worker, introduce him/her to a new environment and guide him/her to their potential.

We can make someone feel like a total failure when they attempt to communicate with us in our native language or show appreciation for their efforts and facilitate their integration in a foreign environment. We can push a plate away from us fixed by a hostess who attempted to impress us with some exotic meal or honor her efforts and make her feel appreciated. The agenda not being to benefit of a meal anylonger but to validate the efforts of the other person.

There is not a day we do not have an opportunity to slow down our agenda (usualy self centered) and consider validating others no matter how " little" we percieve them.

Since your OP was targeting folks in the context of cyber communication, we can delay our agenda of affirming how absolutly right we are and attempt to establish what we may share in common. We can choose to "meet the other person half way" or remain contentious and argue ad nauseum just because we never want to say" I may be wrong". We can engage in participation in a forum for the sole purpose of provoking and pushing buttons or genuinely seek a dialogue where modifying our views is not out of question. We can nit pick on the grammatical and semantical downfalls of the percieved "adversary" or acknowlege the various degrees of education of each.

In general, if we can set our ego centered agenda aside for a moment, we have given our communication a better chance to be recieved.


.

Yes, I have. However, I do not have any issue with people establishing a strategy of a source of guidance and protection(to use your own words i.e guidance and protection) based on fiction as long as it has helped them be a "better version of themselves". To apply a metaphysical explanation to an issue IMO can be profoundly productive if we consider that the material to work on is ourselves rather than attempting to control the rest of mankind. Some will retain Christ as their focal point to improve themselves and as a motivation and inspiration to interact productively and compassionately with fellow human beings. Others, undoubtly, retain Christ as a focal point to make others conformed to their own copyright on character and morality.

It has to do with control over whomever is different from you. Have you considered that as you may challenge the "little people", you are challenging conformism to their beliefs and removing them from the "safety" zone of organized religion, with an established denominational label, titles, authority symbols etc.....you are in fact placing them in the position of refusing to be controlled by them. For a lot of folks, control over others is what gives them a sense of safety.

. You can always choose an alternative to your initial interpretation of my use of the pronoun "we". It requires of course the effort to not attribute the worst intentions to the writer. But again, that is a choice you make. It seems to depend on what pre set state of mind you may have as you attribute intentions. A negative one will undoubtly lead you to infer whichever fault you will to find in anyone.

.

Considering that a "soul" is an abstract concept, I am not sure how many people would use that argument to support the statement I made "We all identify thru our weaknesses". So let me explain which angle I am coming from: life experience. Relationships and rapports with other members of my species. The repeated occurence of my opening up about my own humanity which triggers a sense of trust that I am equiped to recieve favorably and with empathy their own sharing IRW their humanity. We then identify with one and other. We acknowlege our commoness.Equaly, other members of my species have shared openly their humanity with me triggering in me a sense that I can entrust them to recieve mine with empathy rather than disdain.

Let me use a reality based example of the productivity of the "empathy" rapport:

Support groups such as AA rely on the experience of the recovered alcoholic sponsor who has admitted and recognized all the struggles (psychological and physical) involved with the recovery process. That experience is what enables such sponsor to identify with the struggles of any alcoholic. Thus equipping him or her to respond with empathy rather than disdain or indifference.

Since you brought up "fear" IRW the "little people", an honest introspection of your own person may lead you to relate and identify to the defensive process which occurs each time any of us is confronted by a percieved opponant who questions the validity of our very individuality. Certainly, you are not above and beyong that process or do you think you are?

The question I have asked you in my previous post remains a challenge for you to examine and answer to:

Which of the two responses to the "little people" is productive: rubbing their nose into their "fear and weakness" while you can pat yourself on the back as to your own percieved immunity to feeling threatened or guide them gently into a safe zone with you so that a dialogue can be established?

As far as scriptures is concerned, long before I had any exposure to a spiritual path, my natural encline was to relate as intimately as possible to the emotions of other folks. Do not be misguided by the notion that all christians check out at the gates of their faith whichever they experienced in their upbringing, experiences which often have led them to compensate in adulthood for what they lacked in their childhood.

Since this is the psychology forum, we might as well acknowlege the aspect of all the factors which contribute to people responding emotionaly one way or the other. Factors I will remind you, neither you or I have any knowlege of as we communicate with one another in a cyber context. You have your own baggage as I have mine.

.

I suppose that would not apply to any mind who has lived in a world of words and ideas which have been a source of motivation and inspiration to his/her peers. I can think of many writers and philosophers who contributed to the intellectual empowerment of mankind without being involved into a humanitarian action. I certainly will not be critical of their choice of interaction as I recognize their roles as motivators.

What you are pointing to is what we commonly refer to as the difference between "walking the talk" and not walking the talk. However, I certainly will not dismiss the number of christians who do walk the talk because I happen to be exposed to a majority who does not. It is that minority I choose to be edified by and with. Again, it is a matter of which state of mind one has.

I would apply the same principle to any group, religious or not. But my responsibility is to seek to view and percieve others with the greatest degree possible of giving the benefit of the doubt. That is not without great struggle.

IMO we become more secure in whichever convictions we favor the moment we make the conscious choice to not percieve others as the "enemy".

There is definitly one christian centered theme I have expanded from for myself to be motivated to attribute the best intentions and resist the negative drive to infer the worst: make my thoughts captive of Christ. That captivity implies applying positive thinking. It implies bonding with others and finding the commoness. It implies setting aside ego centered responses. It implies adding water to the well rather than oil on the fire. But to come to that point, I had to acknowlege which thoughts were detrimental to me. Then I realized that the rest of my existence is to be a choice of how I will think. Considering that consciousness crisis occured some 15 years ago when I was in my mid thirties, I often feel that I have a lot to modify.

Words can heal. Words can wound. The choice is always ours to make.

Did you forget that Jesus focused on many, many negative things around Him? And He avoided "Bonding" to most people? And He clearly stated He intended to bring a "Sword" between people? If your thoughts are indeed "Captive of Christ," why do you omit saying this?

Did you forget to think that words also can be useless and empty?

Do you feel you have the authority and place to proscribe the only two choices able to be considered about the value of "Words?"

Are you a preacher? It sounds like you operate within a world of words.

JoLonda.

[Rahab]

Did you forget that Jesus focused on many, many negative things around Him? And He avoided "Bonding" to most people? And He clearly stated He intended to bring a "Sword" between people? If your thoughts are indeed "Captive of Christ," why do you omit saying this?. Bonjour Jolonda,

Are you implying that Christ was promoting negative thinking? That He willed for folks to think the worst of one another? I guess such an interpretation can be used as a justification to see the glass half empty when it comes to attribute any intentions to anyone. Including labeling people as "little"from a standpoint view of one's self attributed grandeur.

As far as "bonding" goes. What a tragic image you have of a Christ who did not seek to feel and experience the human condition! Is yours one whose feet floated above the ground and did not walk in "our shoes"? Where did you get the conclusion that " He avoided bonding to most people"? Do you have difficulties envisionning and accepting the humanity of Christ?

It is becoming quite obvious that you expect to be in a position of asking questions without displaying the courtesy to answer mine. Are you uncomfortable with having to use words to communicate your personal choice of what is a productive response to the "little people"? Or is that process of self examination too humbling for you?

.Did you forget to think that words also can be useless and empty?. It depends again which state of mind you, as the recipient, have chosen to restrict yourself to. And if indeed your approach to any thought that is communicated in the context of cyber communication is a "world of words" reflective of "empty and meaningless", your eye will undoubtly behold what you have conditionned your mind to percieve. A rather limited and extreme perception of people's intentions in general.



.Do you feel you have the authority and place to proscribe the only two choices able to be considered about the value of "Words?".

The drama you apply to your perception of why I commented on two specific types of word choices reveals that you have yet to connect my intervention in your thread to the very content of your OP. Where you complain of the communication of the "whiney and hypersensitive christians" but have yet to examine your responsibility IRW to how you may respond to it.And your choice, Jolonda, resides between responding with words which heal or words which wound. And I am not sure you have made that distinction yet. Or even why the choice is to be considered. I gave you an opportunity to reflect on it twice.

Should I suppose at this point that you enjoy being critical without ever proposing a solution where you actively participate?

.Are you a preacher? It sounds like you operate within a world of words.

JoLonda. I tend to avoid preachers. Direct social interaction with all sorts of people is far more productive as far as I am concerned.

"operate".... now, we are here limited to interact via structured language using words as a thought vehicle. Do you have any other suggestion to "operate" differently in a cyber context? Do you have any basis or evidence to submit as to any means I may use to "operate" in my daily life? You do not. Neither do I on your account.

You seem to be focused on a self feeding process of negativity when it comes to attributing and evaluating intentions and that without any direct access thus observation on how a person "operates" in their daily social interaction. Do you not think that it is close to self imposed deception to draw any conclusions on the character of any person based on cyber communication? What activities they utilize or prefer? What motus operanda they may have if any? How they behave or choose certain attitudes? Whether they "walk any talk"?

I would like to return to the content of your OP because that is what drew me to your thread. I do not sympathize with the position of the critique who does not practice the art of offering solutions. And I maintain that the solution is how YOU respond to the "little people". Including how you choose to engage them. Including the high expectations you are placing on anyone's response as you provoke and attempt to make them "tapdance" to your tune.

Some of us are simply not going to "tapdance". We are going to hold you accountable for your own response. We are going to bring the attention back to your own choices.

Again, what is your choice of a productive response to ANYONE who is "whiny and hypersensitive" in this forum? Rub their nose into their "weakness" or bring them into a safe zone with you so that a dialogue can be pursued? That is of course if your participation in T Web is dialogue motivated or if it is just your playground to satisfy a need to push buttons without dealing with the consequences you would deal with face to face. The attractive aspect of cyber communication being the ability to decompress here attitudes most of us are not going to use in direct physical social interaction.

[cardiakeifi]

Jesus was judgmental, but He never feared.

Why would anyone in His Kingdom need to fear?

Are not the pieces of Spiritual armor described in Scripture sufficient by which Christians are to find freedom from fear?

Why would a person calling themself a Christian run from perceived threats into their own emotional resources?

Would Professional Church Talk perhaps help them by informing them of "Their Identity in Christ?"

JoLonda.

"Judge not, lest ye be judged...."
If you believe that Jesus was GOD, then he had the right to judge. If you believe that he was just a man walking a path of enlightenment, if he judged he was perhaps stumbling.

Not one person in this world need fear anything, let alone a Christian. The masses have been controled by fear for eons. Stepping out of fear is not that easy to do. Not saying it can not be done, just that it is hard. Why would a Christian be any different from anyone else. No matter what title they choose to call themselves, they are still fundimentaly human.

Just because a person calls himself Christian does not make them instantly full of virtue and strength of character. Granted, if they truly "felt" the "Christ" in thier belief, they would be less likely to fear.

If Professional Church Talk was to embrace a more loving and tolerant attitude towards their flocks and others, I believe you would see less "lashing out" towards non Christians. Then again, if they give up controling with fear, how the heck are they going to get them to do what they want them to do?
Whe teach them something different. It's working. I am not saying it is right, I am just saying, they have a good thing going that keeps them busy, rich and in what they feel is.. power.

Peace,
Kefi

[Dabid]

Some have no security in their relationship to God. They have not become 'rooted in love'. Childhood is where our brains are programmed. If a parent is abusive, manupulative or otherwise unloving, how will a child learn to respond well to love?

When damaged souls like the above commit themselves to Christ they often have no idea what/who they are commiting themselves too. They may have woollyminded notions, but thats all. They are still confused and on their own against the rest of the world(and church family). That's my 2cents anyhow.

[FreezBee]

When chatting with self proclaimed Christians today, it is very common to inadvertently hurt their feelings by saying something which they feel uncomfortable with. And they react so strongly, as if their lives are being threatened.

Would it be possible for you to give an example. In my personal experience what upsets Christians the most is not personal attacks, but attacks on their faith, especially if you "attack" the Bible. Nost discussions I have been in with other Christians have been concerned with Bible interpretations.

I am thinking that such little people have not yet learned the difference between words and actions. Perhaps it is from faithfully attending so many church services, where only words and talk are presented. Such a constant authoritative verbal input may cause them to unknowingly live in a world of words, where any perceived verbal threat is thought by them to be a material threat.

Well, that's not specific to Christians as far as I know. Many people independent of religion appear to be too hypersensitive and overinterpreting.

Of course, maybe such little people are just made by God to be weak and always afraid, in need of guidance and protection.

Yes, who knows? So give them some guidance and protection, and they might respond differently to you - just maybe :smile:


- FreezBee

[GeminiQueen]

It's comical: the people who you reference to are the first ones to issue their negative criticisms of your comment, doing exactly what it is you claim they do. I love it! lol smile :)

[bigsplit]

I had an experience once when I visited a friend of mine and his lovely wife. She was a passionate Christian, God bless her. Her problem was that she knew the words of the Bible well, but did not understand what they really meant. She was not so aware of the philosophical or skeptic arguments against belief. Her husband and I were sitting at there kitchen table and were discussing some basic philisophical questions and skeptic view points. We were taking turns playing the devil's advocate. She joined us and so we played skeptic with her, and instead of trying to understand the arguments and rebuttals, she just busted out crying and said we were sinning and that she wanted us to stop.

I think we you speak to some Christians who have little intellectual capacity about skeptical arguments, it hurts them and scares them. They do not have the answers to your questions and instead of exploring such issues to expand their knowledge, they run and hide from them....the tears are their method of making you stop.

There is no problem with this because they lack the understanding or brain power to understand the philosophical questions. The problem is these are often the first one's to stand up and say this or that person is going to hell and they are often the most judgemental. I call it spiritual and philosophical immaturity.

[djdavo]

there's all sorts of Christians in all different stages of their 'walk with Christ'. i think you may be onto a good point about (specifically) american evangelicalism, where many of the parisioners are biblically illiterate and don't let the bible or Jesus affect their daily lives whatsoever. it's just another club to belong to. it's not right,but it's a reality. not all christians are like that,however. see below...

Would it be possible for you to give an example. In my personal experience what upsets Christians the most is not personal attacks, but attacks on their faith, especially if you "attack" the Bible. Nost discussions I have been in with other Christians have been concerned with Bible interpretations.


i was actually encouraged by the response to the davinci code: there were many reasoned, well informed arguments put out by Christians to disprove much of what dan brown wrote,as opposed to the histrionic response when the last tempation of christ came out 15 years ago.

we need more people like greg koukl and the like who know their bible and know how to defend it! :)

[The Plain Jane]

When chatting with self proclaimed Christians today, it is very common to inadvertently hurt their feelings by saying something which they feel uncomfortable with. And they react so strongly, as if their lives are being threatened.

I am thinking that such little people have not yet learned the difference between words and actions. Perhaps it is from faithfully attending so many church services, where only words and talk are presented. Such a constant authoritative verbal input may cause them to unknowingly live in a world of words, where any perceived verbal threat is thought by them to be a material threat.

Of course, maybe such little people are just made by God to be weak and always afraid, in need of guidance and protection.

JoLonda.

I don't know why some Christians get upset about heresies that attack the church, like the Divinci Code for example. You bring up that book and they are like "IT'S JUST FICTION" as if the book is just going to oblierate their faith. And as if there are no rebuttles to the book.

[Pilgrim]

I don't know why some Christians get upset about heresies that attack the church, like the Divinci Code for example. You bring up that book and they are like "IT'S JUST FICTION" as if the book is just going to oblierate their faith. And as if there are no rebuttles to the book.
I agree with you. I'd take it even one step further and say, "As if a book like that is important enough, or even smart enough to warrent a rebuttle."

[Beanieboy]

I would like to add something.

Keith Greene, before his accident, would sing smuggly:
"It won't be only Buuuuuddhaaaa sitting on the throne...."

He continues to say that it won't be Mohammed, Rev Moon, etc.

Can someone sing something like this, or listen to this song, and then really be offended by someone who calls the bible "fairy tales"? It's really no different.

I once had someone sing the song to me. I answered: "You're right. It won't be Old Buddha sitting on the throne. Buddha never claimed to be God. He was simply enlightened, and inspiried others to become enlightened as well - in much the way Christ encourages people to become "Christ-like." But you song shows that you know very little about Buddhism, and for being a "religion of love", I see none in your actions. You mean to mock me, and by knowing nothing of my religion, and questionably knowing anything about your own, simply show yourself a fool."

Well, they were "offended." I
In Buddhism, that's called Karma.

I was surprised when people even find things referring to Christianity offensive.
There was a short lived show called "The Book of Daniel." People were offended because the priest has a gay son (Episcopaleans accept gay people - including a scene where a mobster admitted he was gay and said, "Does God hate me?" Think about how sad that is - for someone to assume God hates them). The priest had a pain killer addiction to deal with stress (come quickly, lord Jesus! The Priest is human!!!). Jesus showed up, but only the priest could see him. People were upset that Jesus didn't say, "Do this! Do that!" He was more like a conscience that would simply say, "The pills? Again? Really?" Sometimes he made light of a conversation: "What do you want me to do? Tell you what to do? I'm not a magic 8 ball, and you have a mind of your own. You know what to do. You do. Think about it." BLASPHEMY.

And the result? It gets cancelled.
So, instead of a show that talks about God, and people dealing with their faith, we instead don't talk about it at all.

And the conservatives think they have gained something.

You have. More series that don't dare talk about religion. Heaven forbid we talk about Jesus.

It's really too bad.

[Pilgrim]

You're kimnd of funny there beanie. You complain that you see no actions of love in the Christians you encountered and you do it by calling them fools. Where is that irony meter graphic when you need it?

[MrTulip]

When chatting with self proclaimed Christians today, it is very common to inadvertently hurt their feelings by saying something which they feel uncomfortable with. And they react so strongly, as if their lives are being threatened.

I am thinking that such little people have not yet learned the difference between words and actions. Perhaps it is from faithfully attending so many church services, where only words and talk are presented. Such a constant authoritative verbal input may cause them to unknowingly live in a world of words, where any perceived verbal threat is thought by them to be a material threat.

Of course, maybe such little people are just made by God to be weak and always afraid, in need of guidance and protection.

JoLonda.

Whine whine whine :lol:
Narcissim, the cure for everything :ahem:

[djdavo]

Quote: Originally posted by Jane

I don't know why some Christians get upset about heresies that attack the church, like the Divinci Code for example. You bring up that book and they are like "IT'S JUST FICTION" as if the book is just going to oblierate their faith. And as if there are no rebuttles to the book.



I agree with you. I'd take it even one step further and say, "As if a book like that is important enough, or even smart enough to warrent a rebuttle."


i disagree. this book shook many peoples faith, especially youth group-aged kids across the country. kids haven't faced these sort of challenges to their faith (which is the fault of the churches).

having an informed rebuttle for something that the author claimed was an accurate portrayal of people,places,and things in history is a smart thing to do.

[Pilgrim]

Quote: Originally posted by Jane

I don't know why some Christians get upset about heresies that attack the church, like the Divinci Code for example. You bring up that book and they are like "IT'S JUST FICTION" as if the book is just going to oblierate their faith. And as if there are no rebuttles to the book.






i disagree. this book shook many peoples faith, especially youth group-aged kids across the country. kids haven't faced these sort of challenges to their faith (which is the fault of the churches).

having an informed rebuttle for something that the author claimed was an accurate portrayal of people,places,and things in history is a smart thing to do.
That's really interesting. I have not met one person who's faith was in any way affected by this book and I am involved with people of faith at the local, state and national level. Seems to me that if your faith is affected by such a thing it was a pretty shallow faith to begin with.

[Malista_Dove]

When chatting with self proclaimed Christians today, it is very common to inadvertently hurt their feelings by saying something which they feel uncomfortable with. And they react so strongly, as if their lives are being threatened.

I am thinking that such little people have not yet learned the difference between words and actions. Perhaps it is from faithfully attending so many church services, where only words and talk are presented. Such a constant authoritative verbal input may cause them to unknowingly live in a world of words, where any perceived verbal threat is thought by them to be a material threat.

Of course, maybe such little people are just made by God to be weak and always afraid, in need of guidance and protection.

JoLonda.

I know what you mean. It is hard not to say something that is totally against their religion. I have to watch myself constantly when talking about my views on right and wrong.

I have to admit that whenever my fiance says something offending my religion ...I snap back. I can't help it. I think the only reason I do this is because he does this to aggrivate me. Don't ask. He is wierd. I have no idea why he does this. I try not to be offended by other's words.

Whenever someone else says something, I don't react as much. I do try to give a simple explanation of what my faith is if they want to know.

I just wish that we did not have to be so careful not to tug on someones religious emotional strings.

[JusticeMachine]

Why are there so many, songs about rainbows and what's on the other side?

Rainbow's are visions, they're only illusions, and rainbows have nothing to hide.

[God_is_personal]

Yes, JoLonda, I can be a crybaby when I don't get the attention and approval I want. Thanks for reminding me :wink: at age fifty-nine, you would think I would have gotten over this

[Beanieboy]

A Cup, Lil' Cupcake,

It sounds like you think it is a good idea to provide excuses for immaturity and negligence, calling them reasons and explanations.

I am sure that is the "Nice" thing to do. But it helps nobody. Rather, Cupcake, it enables people to keep being foolish and unproductive people in God's Kingdom.

Now, we do not want that to happen, do we?

JoLonda.

Maybe it's because when you are trying to take the speck out of people's eye, that you are poking them with the tree trunk growing out of your own.

In this response alone, you have been condescending, suggested that one should not be nice, ie, kind, gentle which are fruit of the spirit, that there is only one way to help people - being abrasive, and harsh - and earlier, pointed out that believers should judge each others actions. You left out something - they should judge one another in love, to edify, not exhalt themselves by putting others down, by referring to them as "self professed Christians" or even worse "little people."

And if you don't have love, you have nothing.

Do you think people should believe exactly as you believe, because you know God better than anyone? You have all the answers?
It sounds like you want others to worship you.
Is it lonely up on that pedestal?

Food for thought.

[familyof6]

I have a sister who is a Christian, and she is so defensive about her faith that she ANTICIPATES that someone might offend her. A while back we were all at a family gathering and a news clip came on the TV about the whole '10 commandments in the courthouse' thing. I don't think anyone was even paying attention to the television, and my sister nearly leaps from her chair and says, "everyone thinks that just because I'm a Christian I think it's ok to have the 10 commandments in the courthouse!! I don't think that just because I'm a Christian! And I'm a democrat too!! Not all Christians are conservatives!" The room fell silent, and no one knew what to say. It was completely unprovoked. If I had a nickel for every time she began a sentence with "everyone thinks that just because I'm a Christian....", I'd be a millionaire.

On the other hand, my best friend is a Christian, and he's very open to discussion with me about his faith. We have had many a religious discussion and debate, without either of us personally attacking the other, and without it destroying our close friendship.

I think it's more about personality than anything else.