OK, I think I figured out what the fuck is going on with ācultural christianityā discourse.
Disclaimer: Cultural christianity originally meant, and possibly still means in some places, the following of some Christian rituals (such as Christmas and Easter) by non-Christians and such. This is not about that. This is about ācultural christianityā in the rancid discourse sense.
So, religions seem to consist of two major parts: the theological/philosophical elements and the practices. Most religions in historically literate societies include elements of both. A lot of (mostly secular) Jewish people on tumblr view religion as almost solely practice, with the theology and philosophy as window-dressing. A lot of other people view religion as primarily the theological/philosophical elements, with the rituals as window-dressing. Some see claiming membership in a religion as explicitly endorsing the theological/philosophical elements. (looking at you, @official-kircheis)
āCultural christianityā in the discourse sense, insofar as it has a definition, seems to refer to the view that religion is primarily the theological and philosophical elements (c āJudaism is an orthopraxy and not an orthodoxy!ā). Obviously, this is somewhat unreasonable, given that prioritising theology over practice, if it originated anywhere, originated in Buddhism, not Christianity, and is shared with Buddhism, Islam, and some varieties of Hinduism. However, most Tumblr Jews donāt know much about Hinduism, Buddhism, or Islam, and most people they interact with on tumblr donāt come from a Hindu, Buddhist, or Muslim background (I should note that I come from a Hindu background), so they assumed that this was a primarily Christian phenomenon.
Atheists (including me) generally oppose the theological and philosophical elements of religion for being generally incorrect and often directly opposed to sanity, factuality, and reason. We also generally oppose deleterious (typically here meaning ācoerciveā) practices. However, we generally donāt oppose harmless rituals and donāt think thereās any reason for them to go away. (c @evilsoupās reference to painting easter eggs)
However, many tumblr Jews are already secular, and have more or less already abandoned the theological elements of their religion (other than a vague belief in some sort of creator god) and the more deleterious practices, and for them, their religion is primarily the harmless rituals, and so, when atheists talk about āeliminating religionā, they donāt hear āeliminating belief in God and atavistic coercive practicesā, they hear āwe want you to give up harmless cultural practicesā, which atheists donāt actually want to do. This is where the defensive discourse autopilot comes in.
Basically, I think that to a substatial extent, the main issue here is two different definitions of āreligionā, and one of those definition being (incorrectly) identified as uniquely Christian.
(There are some other things lumped into ācultural christanityā other than christian practices and the view of religion as primarily theological: the one that comes to mind is IIRC @vaspiderās assertion that Marxist revolutionary thought is reskinned messianism, which I actually agree with; however, messianism is not unique to Christianity; the Christian notion of the messiah originates from Judaism, which may have in turn imported it from an early form of Zoroastrianism; in any case, the idea of a messianic figure appears in most forms of Hinduism, some forms of Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Samaritanism, Judaism, Islam, and Mesoamerican traditional religion, at a very minimum. I think that this is once again an incorrect assertion that a much broader thing in religions is actually unique to Christianity.)
Um.
I canāt speak for anybody else, but⦠no, youāre way off on a lot of your presuppositions, so the end conclusions cannot be correct.
Trying to divide Jews into āreligious Jewsā and āsecular Jewsā misses the point entirely. Jews are Jews. Period.
But for the sake of argument, even trying to divide Jews into āsecular Jewsā and āreligious Jewsā fails, because even within ourselves we talk about a minimum of four different types of Jews (see: the four fruits of Sukkot). So even if I concede the idea of there being meaningful divisions between ātypes of Jews,ā the only time this comes up is when we engage in symbolism which specifically says āand thatās why our community isnāt whole unless we have all kinds of Jews!ā
Iām not even going to get into your assumption that those of us having these conversations donāt know anything about Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, etc. except to point out that in Tumblr discussions it is generally considered at best dĆ©classĆ© to speak for other minority-in-the-US practice and belief by ⦠well, most people. Itās not my place to try to explain other peopleās systems of belief - only to speak for my own.
When I talk about Cultural Christianity, Iām speaking not just about āpainting Easter eggs,ā but about the means in which being raised in a primarily Xian environment affects not just oneās belief in a Supreme Deity, but the ways in which that affects oneās view of the following non-exhaustive list of topics:
āSinā or āwrong actionā, including whether or not one can sin by thought alone
Gender and gender roles
Sexuality
The concept of a division between religion and greater culture
Religion and faith as a thing one individually attests rather than being initiated into by the extant members
Punishment vs. Rehabilitation
The assumption of government on which holidays are ādefaultā holidays
The assumption that one must be a āreligiousā member of another culture or faith to celebrate its holidays, such that a āsecularā Jew might encounter difficulty in getting legal protections for time off for those holidays from work (filed under: things Iāve actually seen)
The assumption that certain (Xian) holidays can and should be celebrated in a āsecularā manner by members of other cultures and that doing so is harmless and not in fact a means of enforcing a Dominant Xian Homogenous Culture on others
The assumption that all religions/faiths contain a focus on the afterlife as a primary goal, rather than the life weāre currently living
The assumption that all faiths even have a solid conception of an afterlife
A consistent tendency to refer to Xianity itself as a singular religion instead of a grouping of related religions, some of which really really hate each other and view each other as totally illegitimate
A tendency to speak of all Xianity as if itās all American Protestantism
An assumption that the rest of us are individually focused as opposed to community focused.
And so many more things. Iām extremely aware of a lot of these things because I brought a lot of assumptions to the process by which I was adopted by Abraham and Sarah and became their kid, and itās been a process of stripping back those assumptions. So like, a lot of those things? Those are things I know exist because I had to deal with them inside of me. There are a lot of basic assumptions about how the world works that come with Xianity, and just not believing in Jesus anymore doesnāt get rid of those things. When I talk about Cultural Xianity, that is part of what I mean.
But.
The root of the issue that a lot of people have taken, very patiently and at great length, with @evilsoup and those who have defended their central thesis, is at the statement that in a utopia where everyoneās material needs are met, āyour people (that is, Judaism) will naturally cease to exist.ā
You see how thatās a problem, right?
You see how thatās a threat, right?
You understand how saying āJudaism will cease to existā not only flies in the face of 6000 years of evidence to the contrary, but sounds like a threat to us, yes?
You understand that this assumption, that āif we let the Jews fully participate in [French] culture, theyāll stop being Jews [and become French, which is a Christian culture],ā is almost word for word the Napoleonic plan for the elimination of Judaism in France, right? He let the Jews out of the ghettos, thinking that if our material needs were met and if we were fully brought into society, weād just stop being Jews. That was literally the whole plan.
This isnāt new, this assumption that we are only Jewish bc there is some sort of unmet physical need. Itās exactly what a lot of antisemites have said in the past. So when we hear quack quack quack quack coming up the road, we think, ah yes, thatās Napoleonās Duck again.
There is no way to say, āYour people will cease existing,ā which isnāt a threat. It goes like this:
āIn this situation, your people will cease existing.ā
āNo, we wonāt do that. We will choose to continue to exist unless you force us to stop.ā
So now what? Either generic-you forces us to stop being Jews or Judaism (and Jews) continues to exist.
Either way, a) the central thesis of evilsoupās thesis is wrong, and b) weāre not speaking for anyone else, just for us. That doesnāt mean we donāt know anything about other faiths or peoples, just that weāre speaking only for us.
This feels like missing the point? Evilsoup is positing that religion exists and continues for a particular reason, once this reason is no longer present, it will start to die out. Which does seem to be happening across much of the developed world, less than 2% of people in England attend CofE services regularly.
Thereās more than zero reason to think that people will stop being religious, or at least it will drastically decline, as living standards increase and discrimination decreases.
Youāre interpreting it as, fundamentally a value judgement, other people are seeing it primarily as a cause effect model.
āWe will continue to exist until you force us to stopā isnāt a thing you get to say because it isnāt about you, or how you feel or how even anyone alive today feels. Itās about how your descendants will feel, having grown up in a much better world. Claiming that they will obviously feel the same way you do strikes me as pretty presumptuous!
So a) you cited Christianity in a discussion specifically about how you canāt generalize Christianity
B) is not presumptuous to say āan assumption that people like me wonāt exist in your perfect world is real ickyā. Itās not presumptuous to say that a culture that has survived millennia through good and bad is not going to just stop, thatās just pattern recognition.
I think itās actually pretty reasonable to compare abrahamic religions to each other. As for B, you could say exactly the same thing about Christianity, *and yet*
The notion evilsoup is putting forward is literally just āopiate of the massesā and who, throughout history, has been more in need of comfort and a positive common identity than Jews. I would not at all be surprised to see that identification with Judaism declines alongside declines in antisemitism.
At this point I canāt tell if you just donāt understand what words mean or if youāre deliberately being obtuse here but ācultural genocideā doesnāt mean āpeople stop doing this without being forced to,ā āreligion is an opiate of the massesā was a Christian statement about how Christianity in particular divorces people from their material environment, a thing Judaism specifically does not do, and your head is so far up your ass you could lick your duodenum.
Fuckās sake.
Where exactly did you get the impression that Marx was talking about only Christianity?
Also, Iām talking about cultural genocide in that way because thatās how you seem to be talking about it. Nothing evilsoup said implies a desire for cultural genocide, just a sincere belief in the idea that religion is the opiate of the masses, and that Judaism is included within that phrase.
The notion that Judaism isnāt included in that phrase strikes me as somewhat ludicrous. The notion that there is some agentic creator that is responsible for the universe and that cares about humans seems like an obviously soothing notion is a critical element of most monotheistic religions!
Because Marxās presuppositions only fit Christianity, you fucking sealion.
Good lord, what a waste of syllables you are. Goodbye.
Couple things to add to this:
Thereās never been a time where religion and faith were āunneededā. Anti-theists predict such a time is rapidly approaching and have for.. uh⦠like 2,000 odd years or so.
Thereās no reasonable basis for this hypothesis. Sure, thereās more people who arenāt particularly religious, today, compared to 200 years ago⦠but it comes in waves. Always has. For a -long- time during what is now considered the āDark Agesā there was a -huge- dearth of faith among peasants in (Christian) medieval Europe, and records indicate that various concessions and shortcuts (like the Christian focus on the 10 commandments and 7 deadly sins) were specifically made to ādumb downā Christianity for people.
Add in jewish people with their faith being much more accessible (since you didnāt need someone to read it to you from Latin) and retained and you had a minority outgroup to attack as part of 'reignitingā Christianity in Europe.
(And donāt get me started on the Moors in Spain being essentially the beginning of anti-black racism rising out of Christianity)
2. Religion is philosophical but also -spiritual-, and many humans enjoy their spiritual aspects and hopes for their family/connection to their history.
No matter how hard you divide the human body down to atoms and subatomic particles before dramatically screaming 'Whereās the soul?!ā people will find comfort within the idea that there is an immortal aspect to themselves, and to those they love, which continues on perpetually.
There will always be people who find comfort in looking back upon the line of their ancestors and find strength and love in what they do. Who take comfort and hold memories tied to various rituals and moments.
And, of course, there will always be -community- and -connection- within religion and religious spaces.
Anti-Theists think the world will eventually stop having religion because they see themselves as 'rightā and everyone else as 'wrongā and believe that, eventually, everyone will be 'rightā.
But the truth is? Thereās no reason to believe religion will ever die out. Not even -specific- religions, like Christianity. Itās just stubborn desire to be 'rightā
The purpose of myth and ritual is not āconvince an uncaring universe to give you a better afterlife.ā It is ābe human and relate to each other in ways the uncaring universe does not.ā
There is no amount of material prosperity or enlightened communication that will eliminate that need.



















