Are Christian Values something that Non-Christians lack?

[Humanist_Activist]

I ask, because I see phrases such as whether people "act Christian" or the lauded, yet elusively defined values that Christians have that must be exclusive to them, because they are always called Christian, are they not?

Can someone PLEASE define these values for me?

[intaglio]

1. It will depend which sect answers

but essentially the reply will include "Faith, Hope and Charity," which are not exclusive to Christianity. Some may cite the Beatitudes but again they are a common currency in both philosophy and other faiths.

[skepticscott]

2. I suspect you'll wait in vain

for a direct, non-weaselly answer to this question. No one here will be able to set out a list of values that are exclusively Xstian, or that are obtainable only by being a Xstian, but they will also avoid stating plainly that the notion of exclusively Xstian values is stupid and divisive, even when "liberal" and "progressive" Xstians tout them.

[cbayer]

3. Values are values.

Christians and other religious groups have codified their value sets to one extent or another, but one need not be religious to have a set of values, of course.

If a non-theist happens to have a value set similar to the one held by many, if not most christians, they might accurately say that they share christian values.

That in no way means that that value set is exclusive to or originated from christians. It just means that they share something in common. The difference is that one believes in god and the other doesn't.

[trotsky]

4. Given the voting patterns of non-believers,

a far greater percentage of them embrace what are arrogantly and intolerantly referred to as "Christian values." So why not call them something else? Why use language that divides and puts down?

I don't expect an answer from you, but you should understand why others find your language abusive and insulting.

[Humanist_Activist]

6. Can you define these values, and why label them Christian? n/t

[cbayer]

7. I can't define them, but various denominations do.

And I don't label them christian. I said that if a group holds a set of values and they attribute them to the doctrine of that group, they might call them xxxx values. If you share that set of values with them, then you might also call them xxxx values, or the values that I hold that are similar to the xxxx group that also holds them.

I think most believers and non-believers share similar values. They aren't necessarily christian except to the group that identifies them with their religion. They clearly exist outside that designation as well.

[Humanist_Activist]

9. So basically the phrase is meaningless except as an attempt at being exclusive. n/t

[cbayer]

11. Not at all. I would guess that there are a set of values that you

attribute to Humanism. Those can be found in many places, even if they vary to some degree.

I doubt that humanists would use the phrase "humanist values" to be exclusive, but rather to refer to a set of values they ascribe to without having to go through them.

They certainly are not exclusive to humanism.

[Humanist_Activist]

12. The issue is that Humanism is a type of ethical philosophy...

removed from religion, most of its principles are well defined and fleshed out, and non-exclusive by their nature, there are Christian Humanists, Secular Humanists, etc.

It is internally consistent, generally concise in definitions, etc. In other words, everything that Christianity lacks. Christianity, as far as universal definitions go, you just have to believe Jesus was the Messiah and Divine, from an ethical, moral, or even general worldview outlooks, anything goes beyond that, hence the mentioning of Christian Humanists.

[cbayer]

14. Ethical philosophy or religious philosophy? Making a distinction is just

showing a prejudice towards one model as opposed to the other.

In addition to christian humanists, there are christian secularists. What they hold as values cross over between the groups.

You appear to want to make the case that the term "christian values" is used in a way that excludes non-christians from holding those values. While some fundamentalists may agree with you, I would wager that most christians do not...
and certainly not the christians that frequent this site.

I've met nice humanists that seem to exemplify what I understand humanism to be and I've met humanist assholes who behave a lot like religious fundamentalists. So I would argue that the "definitions" you say are consistent and concise are really wide open to interpretation by individuals.

Anyway, I think you have already made up your mind about this.

[Humanist_Activist]

16. No, I'm trying to point out majority privilege in the use of language...

we don't talk about Hindu values or Muslim values, and Jews sometimes get lumped in with Christians with the "Judeo-Christian" values argument when Christians feel somewhat inclusive. The term is loaded, inaccurate, and downright insulting to non-Christians, it shows either unconscious or conscious bias against non-Christians of all stripes.

[cbayer]

18. I'm not sure why you phrased this OP in the form of a question.

The whole thing was about trying to prove your point.

I disagree with you, though. While the term can be used to exclude, for most people it is a benign referral to what some believe are the teachings of Jesus.

But I don't think you will ever believe that.

So much for the humanist value of respecting humans as individuals.

[Humanist_Activist]

19. Correction...

for most Christians it is believed to be a benign referral to what some believe are the teachings of Jesus.

Don't even pretend to know the minds of non-Christians, that's beyond insulting, and I'm not the only one to point this out.

[cbayer]

20. Pretend to know the minds of non-Christians?

What are you talking about?

[Humanist_Activist]

22. You claimed that most people think its a benign reference to Jesus, you have no way to know that...

most Christians, sure, but not most people, that's what I corrected.

Unless, to you, people equals Christians only.

[cbayer]

23. You may be correct and I meant to say most christians.

In fact, I don't think most christians even use this phrase.

Yeah, I think that all people are christians, lol. Oh, except for me and most of the people I know.

[Humanist_Activist]

24. No, I meant you think Christians are the only ones who are people(that matter)...

or something to that affect.

And honestly, yes, most Christians do use that phrase and others that have the same affect, though not as widely today as in the past, for example saying that people "act Christian" when they are charitable, or that something(good) is the "Christian thing to do". Its this whole conflation of "Good(acts, deeds, thoughts)=Christian" that grates in a way that is like nails on a chalkboard. Its kinda like trying to talk to white people about white privilege, its something that most of them just don't get.

[cbayer]

25. Well, I don't in any way think that christians are the only ones that matter.

I do think they matter, though, and don't extrapolate the behavior of some to all.

Since I don't think there is any data to support either the position that most christians do or don't use that phrase or that they do or don't use it to exclude others, we can't know whether either of us is correct.

I would agree with you that when the phrase is used in your examples, that's offensive. It does sound like they are saying that it is a behavior or act that is unique to christians.

But you asked the question here and of this population, and I think the answer to your original question in this context is "No".

[Humanist_Activist]

26. Christian majority, and thinking permeates the culture, even here on DU...

That's why I disagree, just like, even among white people on DU, some still don't recognize some of their white privilege(and I say this as a white person), most Christians on this board wouldn't be aware of the exclusive nature of the language they use, they may even think they are doing the opposite of what they think they are doing.

I know many non-Christians who basically just roll their eyes at such use of language, its expected of Christians to be full of themselves, I, however, would prefer to try to make them self aware of their own privilege, and check against it.

[cbayer]

27. Those are really good points.

I think that also applies to males and straight people in general and on this site, as well as pretty much any minority group.

It's tricky to point it out, though, isn't it? IMO, it's best to do it in a way that they are most likely to hear it. Using examples they can relate to and explaining that they are most likely doing it without even realizing it.

Hostility rarely gets the point across.

Anyway, I hear you right now and I think I understand your point.

[PotatoChip]

31. The only people I ever hear using that term

seem to be fundies of the teabagger-type variety. The ones who carry on about the need for prayer in schools, abstinence only education; the folks who are smug foot soldiers in the war on women, LGBT people, the poor, ect. Basically folks that (imho) very much resemble the pharisees and sadducees of Jesus' day. You know... the types who put great emphasis on 'works' and equally as obnoxious, perfect morality (as they define it) which, btw no human can ever hope to acheive... As opposed to salvation by grace.

That term they use, "Christian Values" reminds me an awful lot of their other nonsensical memes, such as "They hate us for our freedoms" ect.

Got a little off topic here, so getting back to your question in the OP:

Are Christian Values something that Non-Christians lack?

Fwiw, my answer to that would be no. Non-Christians don't necessarily lack 'Christian Values' as I understand the term to mean. But it's not something I would use to define myself as a follower of Christ's teachings and definitely will forever do my best to keep it that way.

[okasha]

28. Take your own advice.

Don't even pretend to know the minds of non-Christian believers; that's beyond insulting.

[Humanist_Activist]

29. I didn't say anything about the minds of non-Christians, did I? n/t

[okasha]

32. Post 26

nt

[Humanist_Activist]

34. Learn reading comprehension. n/t

[LostOne4Ever]

5. Every time

I hear the term Christian Values its usually from the religious right. While I can't define it myself it seems to be exclusive of anyone (regardless of if that person is a Christian or not) who believes in liberty and equality.

So if they are something I lack, I would consider that a good thing. Wouldn't you





All joking aside, I think it is just a way for the religious right to think they are superior to everyone. They have no set definition and are meant to include everything good while excluding everything bad.

It is especially annoying when the term is used interchangeably with the word "family" when non-christians also have families as well.

[okasha]

10. What's even more annoying

is the invocation of "fanily values" that actually attempt to prevent the formation of legally recognized families or policies that are designed to humiliate and impose extra burdens on poor families.

[LostOne4Ever]

13. Agree 100%

All they want to do is make a family like everyone else and the religious rights goes out of their way to stop them. I can't help but wonder how they reconcile their actions with the golden rule...if they think of that at all.

[pinto]

8. No.

[hrmjustin]

15. I think Jesus appealed to humans better nature as do other belief systems.

I think people of faith and no faith can appeal to and follow their better nature.

[Humanist_Activist]

17. I always find it is the reverse, people's better natures cherry pick...

from their chosen religious text/hero to reinforce their preexisting beliefs.

[hrmjustin]

21. That is a good point for some. The reality is people have values not matter

what belief system they hold.

[skepticscott]

30. It's not an accident that you exclude people

without a "belief system" from that. But your own statement is a clear acknowledgement that "values" do not need any particular religious tradition in order to be fostered. Which pretty much trashes one of the main justifications for having religion in the first place.

[backscatter712]

33. Open up the Rorschach book and pick which values you think are Christian...

You can pick verses out of the Bible to justify anything, from the be-nice-to-each-other and help-the-poor stuff (which I encourage) to the obey-God-by-committing-genocide and let-the-poor-rot stuff.