disillusioned

Hmmm. Interesting article. Similar to what @wellnamed was saying about the historical relationship between Christianity and a European identity. I think it's fairly clear that culturally, this person was a member of the "Christian" west. Whether he was actually a professing Christian or not is a separate issue.

Again, fair enough, but I'm not sure that yelling "Jesus Saves!" makes someone a Christian, or means that they are representative of Christianity as a whole. It certainly doesn't mean they what they are doing is in keeping with Christian teaching. Similar things may be said of those who yell "Allahu Akhbar!". In any event, I don't have any reason to think that this was actually an act of Christian terrorism.

Fair enough. The difference is, my post was tongue in cheek, and has since been acknowledged as such. Good luck finding someone from the other side willing to say as much. Again, this situation is something which is entirely reprehensible in and of itself. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. But. When a brown person shoots some people, everyone wants to scream "RADICAL ISLAMIC TERRORISM!!", reason, and rash labelling, be damned. That's all.

No, nothing at all. I don't know that the shooters here professed to be Christians, specifically. My post was an attempt to point out the hypocrisy inherent in those who immediately wish to scream "ISLAMIC TERRORISM!" whenever a middle eastern person commits some such atrocity, but decline to lable this kind of attack in a similar light. Nothing more.

Just say it: Radical. Christian. Terrorism. A terrible, terrible situation. I remember a couple years ago when the mosque in Quebec city got shot up, a bunch of my students at the time who were refugees from Syria were really messed up by it. They came here to get away from that kind of thing. It was hard to deal with that. Gun laws are important, and should be talked about. But, (and here's a real controversial opinion) so should hate speech laws. Not to derail, and I'm not sure of the motivation of the individuals involved in this specific case, or of NZ's laws on what can and can't be said. Furthermore, in today's world, this is really an international issue. But still. People will believe just about anything. If they hear it repeated often enough, doubly so. And some of them will act on it.

I haven't actually lost any relationships, but most of them have fundamentally changed. My parents and siblings and I are on relatively good terms now. Things are still strained, but much less than they used to be. Mostly, we just avoid certain conversations. We also don't see each other as often as we might. I haven't had any actual falling outs with my friends, but we've drifted apart to the point where there are some that I see anually, and some that I haven't seen in years. These are people that I used to see multiple times a week. We just have different interests now. And that's fine.

Welcome Jerry! It's great that you found us. Timing of telling friends and family is tricky, and obviously varies a great deal from situation to situation. If it's not the right time, it's not the right time. Living a lie is hard, but, as you know, there are real risks involved with coming out. At least you're free on the inside. I think you'll find lots of people here who can relate. Dive right in.

@Christforums this deserves your attention. LF's question should be addressed. How do you know that your version is the correct one? What makes you so special?

Now I'm confused. Is he on a horse, or an ass? There are clearly two possible readings here. Who has the one, correct, inspired interpretation of this text?

Good fucking riddance.

No need for me to talk to your pastor or an expert, I'm just trying to get a handle on where you're coming from. I see that Jesus has attributes of a human being. He is also supposed o have attributes which are not normal for humans. The ability to rise from the dead, for example. It seems untenable to me to claim that the biblical account is correct, and that Jesus was merely human. But it's not my belief, so I suppose it's not my problem.

So you believe Jesus is the Son of God, but not God. Hmmmm. Does he sit at God's right hand? Will he return, to reign for all eternity? Presumably he's more than merely human. Some kind of demigod? Honestly asking.

So how do you classify yourself?

I agree with much of what is written in that article. Almost none of it is unique to "woke SJWs" though. Any passionate, politically motivated (dare I say populist?) group could be substituted throughout most of the piece without having to make more than superficial changes. Again, I agree with the author that progressives can, and should, do better. And I think many of us are concerned with this, and are committed to doing better. But I also agree with what @wellnamed alluded to earlier, that lots of people try out new ideas in college, and sometimes they get a bit too radical. In a very real way, that's what colleges are for. I still think lumping all progressives in with the SJW crowd is a major mistake. Many of us are not like that, and some of us criticize, and even engage in a little gentle mocking of them from time to time. Still, I think it's important for society as a whole that these ideas continue to be explored and expressed. And those who disagree should voice their dissent. As long as it's done peacefully, where's the harm? It seems to me that free societies progress in this way; through peaceful dissent and the exchange of ideas. Sometimes good ideas, sometimes bad ones. But it seems fairly clear to me that ideas precede social action. So we need good ideas before we can undertake positive societal change. And sometimes we get to good ideas by throwing bad ones around and arguing about it.