to think that Cultural Christianity is not a baffling concept?

[GooseberryRoolz]

I keep reading and hearing apparent bafflement about this.

It's NOT baffling is it?

This reminds me of the time I asked my brother what a rubber johnny was when I was about 12, he laughed and said 'I can't believe you don't know that, you're so stupid. You should ask someone'. I pointed out that I was asking someone. Him.

Of course he had no idea and just wanted to feel superior.

Charming user. Crucially, though, you weren't insisting that condoms didn't exist and he wasn't querying how you arrived at that idea so it's not a very apt analogy

User is right
Just a rough definition would be nice

you linked to the thread I commented on & that's why I commented, but whatevs, you carry on carrying on, op & I'll carry on asking if I don't understand something.
And well done for being so clever.

Where do live lorelei? UK?

You have come on here using a phrase which many people have never heard of and (and this is where the similarity lies) when people have asked you what it means you have replied in a very scathing way, choosing to demean people rather than answer the question. I wonder why this is, if you don't feel that it makes you superior?

The uk has a Christian history, churches, paintings, democracy/governing system and traditions. Our monuments make reference more than not to Christianity, our holidays are based on the Christian calender. Christianity is tied in with uk culture, other countries have different traditions. Learning about the bible helps understand our tradition and history. I think it is important that we acknowledge the history and understand how the systems we have came into being whatever our faith.

user

I wasn't being scathing. I broke my own rule about always posting in a detailled, comprehensive way, especially on AIBU. But that's because it was late on Sunday night and I'd had a . Laziness really.

I'm not going to agree with aggressive posters telling me I had sneery or superior intent , because I didn't.

It was just incredulity and sloppy posting.

But if you want to continue to be rude, fill your boots.

I had not heard of the phrase before, but I'd say I was culturally Christian.

It's not been very helpful that you've been abrasive OP, so I'll explain what I think it is, to me:

Was christened, went to Sunday school a little bit. School in the 1970s/80s always included hymns and Carols. Knew lots of Bible stories. Can recite the Lord's Prayer. Kind of think it's important to value building of religious significance. Love being in churches, and regret maybe that my children don't know hymns and Carols etc.

But

Glad that my kids know as much about other regions as they do Christianity

Total atheist

Disagree with Faith schools

religions, not regions

No. I think it's blindingly obvious what it is.

But thanks for illustrating the bafflement beautifully grin

Putting at the end of a post doesn't stop it being scathing. If you can't see that, it's no skin off my nose but it does make me laugh.

What IS the point of emojis then? I thought indicating when you were being light-hearted was one of their most useful functions.

Yes I live in the UK

Narp, thanks for your helpful post.

I would suggest that saying something cutting and then putting an emoji at the end is akin to saying I'm not being funny but....

Okay. That's what you think. Noted.

My favourite is total wankers who strIke out what they really mean. And then smile passive-aggressively

At least that has the benefit that it's clear what they 'really mean' and there's no room to invent 'real meanings' for them.

I thought it was Scottish who was convinced that smilies (and even more bizarrely brackets- never got my head round that at all) were passive aggressive?

well we're all sorted.

Gooseberry is fucking amazing and it's a miracle I can type instead of dragging my knuckles along the floor.

what a useful thread.

lorelei what on earth are you on about?

I don't think it is baffling - and I don't think it is baffling why some religious Christians may find the term weird/wrong/uncomfortable or baffling that others may not have heard or understand it right away.

I do find it baffling throwing other groups into it to prove a point. I and many other people I know have had plenty of people sneer at and had our culture and family traditions belittled when we're not devout or not observant but still join in with certain things or want to use holiday time to do or be with our families for our family's traditions -- and I've had even more people sneer at me for not taking part in Christian traditions or holidays by pushing on the 'well, you've not really any other religion, so there is no harm' as if there is no other reason not to do so. The whole idea that the rest of us get away with being secular and part of our culture/family's traditions freely is quite baffling and nothing like I've ever experienced. More people may know the term but that doesn't make it any easier.

I think Goodeberry has been remarkably polite and friendly, personally.

It was an interesting invitation for people to think and offer their opinions.

I find the tone of some of the responses truly, bizarrely confrontational.

She hasn't broken into your house and shagged your dog. She's asked what people think about something.

I dread to think how some posters deal with truly challenging situations.

Baffling.

"aster is based on a pre-Christian pagan festival.
Christmas has hijacked Yule - another pre-Christian pagan festival.
The vernal equinox was another pre-Christian pagan festival hijacked to become the Annunciation.
Et cetera.

So surely we are cultural pagans?"

No, because these traditions didn't come to us straight from paganism. They've passed through Christianity first, if you know what I mean.

lorelei9 I can’t imagine why someone who believed in nothing from a particular religion would call themselves of that relgion.

Well, plenty of people seem to. They do all the religious stuff - in the case of Christianity, they go to chuch, get their children baptised etc, but the way they live their lives otherwise, indicate they don't really believe it, and if you pressed them on it they would presumably admit that no, they don't believe it literally. I did give examples in my post. Compare someone who is a churchgoer and forgets about it the rest of the week with someone who consults the Bible and prays (and believes they hear/feel god answering) over decisions and issues in their life etc. I would say the first one is more "culturally Christian" and the second more actually Christian.

I don't know why someone would carry on claiming to be a certain religion, or practising various elements, but then I'm not the one doing it! I supposed it's comforting; as I mentioned I quite like the idea of being "vaguely Christian", going to church etc. without having to fully commit and say "yes I literally believe Jesus is the son of god" etc etc. Because I don't KNOW, but I do think there is something out there and a religion is a convenient way of acknowleding that, somehow.

thecatfromjapan "She hasn't broken into your house and shagged your dog"

^ this wins the thread