I wonder if we could get a ruling from the mods on this.
I've noticed for some time posters hostile to Christianity use the abbreviation Xian instead of the full term. Xian is a well-known putdown on the internet, for example, on Richard Dawkins' website.
Personally, I find this offensive and disrespectful. It is Babble policy to avoid hateful and insulting terminology, which this clearly is.
Can the mods make a statement that this is unacceptable behaviour?
Xian is offensive? Never knew that, I'd imagine X-mas must be too. I can't imagine my referring to April 23rd as Zombie Jesus Day was taken well either.
Not sure if you're in the best position to play word police given the fact that you describe Judy Rebicks comments on the election as "leftist hysterics".
And welcome to babble.
Hi Wat, welcome to babble. I don't think using "Xian" for "Christian" is a "put-down." I'd call it more of an "irreverance." At worst, it's a diminuitive. And we have no problem with those. Witness: USian, Stevie, Iggy, etc. Of course, many babblers don't need to shorten "Christian" to fill it with all kind of nasty sentiments, most, if not all of them, justified. Then there's the whole matter of global power dynamics, which don't really put Christians in a protected category. I've been known to use it in the past, but I've also abstained because I know some people are offended by its usage. I'm afraid this is one of those things you'll have to learn to live with if you'd like to particpate on babble.
I don't normally use the X. It's difficult enough to describe the indescribable as it exists without abbreviating things.
I'd call it more of an "irreverance."
Speaking as an ex-Xian, that's how I use it.
I always thought it was some sort of shorthand term for Ebay record listings (like KBD or popsike or Pokora) as in ULTRA RARE XIAN ACID FOLK PSYCH
Personally, I find this offensive and disrespectful. It is Babble policy to avoid hateful and insulting terminology, which this clearly is.
Clearly hateful and insulting terminology? Xian and Xmas as terms were in common use by the 15th century at the latest. They were created by Xians as they used X as the symbol for the word christ and it saved time and space. Persecution complex much?
And while we're at it, we should ban "tory" as a term for the harperites because it means thieves and marauders.
...oh wait, they ARE thieves and marauders
And "Xmas" and similar use of the letter to denote christians is about 900 years old.
Richard Dawkins, has a website? Excellent.
Thanks for the tip, Wat.
And "Xmas" and similar use of the letter to denote christians is about 900 years old.
Ack, to think the Xtians have been on the receiving end of offensive commentary for 900 years!
Hi Wat, welcome to babble. I don't think using "Xian" for "Christian" is a "put-down." I'd call it more of an "irreverance." At worst, it's a diminuitive. And we have no problem with those. Witness: USian, Stevie, Iggy, etc. Of course, many babblers don't need to shorten "Christian" to fill it with all kind of nasty sentiments, most, if not all of them, justified. Then there's the whole matter of global power dynamics, which don't really put Christians in a protected category. I've been known to use it in the past, but I've also abstained because I know some people are offended by its usage. I'm afraid this is one of those things you'll have to learn to live with if you'd like to particpate on babble.
I don't even think it's a put-down or irreverent. It's just an abbreviation. I use it all the time here without any positive or negative intentions.
As to the "global power dynamics" supposedly enjoyed by Xians, I don't understand why people slot huge groups of people, who live in widely differing circumstances, into "protected" and "unprotected" categories like that as though complex groups like Xians (or Muslims or Hindus, etc.) are composed of indistinguishable individuals who represent a monolithic mass.
As to the "global power dynamics" supposedly enjoyed by Xians, I don't understand why people slot huge groups of people, who live in widely differing circumstances, into "protected" and "unprotected" categories like that as though complex groups like Xians (or Muslims or Hindus, etc.) are composed of indistinguishable individuals who represent a monolithic mass.
I think our way of looking at this has been coloured by the last 30 years since Evangelicals have started to take over political power in the U.S. Because frankly, the only Christians who are on the top of the pile are big established churches.... and even then it is only those who are part of, and on the side of their hierarchy.
It has not been quite the same story for Cathars, Quakers, Anabaptists, and even some Catholics and Protestants who found themselves on the wrong side of power systems - and many of whom resisted oppression BECAUSE of their faith. Without denying the religious aspect of some of the Evangelical campaigns, putting all the blame on religion is just as much a red herring here as it is in Northern Ireland.
Frankly, I think those who are really after the power would love for us to continue to blame religion.
As to the "global power dynamics" supposedly enjoyed by Xians, I don't understand why people slot huge groups of people, who live in widely differing circumstances, into "protected" and "unprotected" categories like that as though complex groups like Xians (or Muslims or Hindus, etc.) are composed of indistinguishable individuals who represent a monolithic mass.
Who's talking about "huge groups of people...in widely differing circumstances"? I'm talking about "global power dynamics," obviously a broad and generalizing term. It simply means that in the Western political discourse we currently inhabit, Christianity and Christian secularism are part of the dominant ideology. Certainly if we were talking about Filipino political culture or society, it would serve us to break that down a bit, but we're not. Such gestures merely serve to distract us from the political culture of North America and the West: which is firmly conversant with the traditions, mores and codes of 2000 years of crusader theology.
Xian is the capital of the Shaanxi province.
Xtian is the common abbreviation for "Christian".
Jeezus
Personally, I find this offensive and disrespectful. It is Babble policy to avoid hateful and insulting terminology, which this clearly is.Clearly hateful and insulting terminology? Xian and Xmas as terms were in common use by the 15th century at the latest. They were created by Xians as they used X as the symbol for the word christ and it saved time and space. Persecution complex much?
In fairness to the OP, that history is not necessarily known by many Christians. Growing up, in my church we were often told that X-mas was an attempt by secular humanists to expunge Christ from Christmas.
@ Freedom 55
Well, seeing as they used a big X to try and expunge Christ in the first place, I can see how they might make that assumption.
(and yes, I know it is actuallly the latin version of the greek "Chr" , for Christ"
I had a devout Christian for a Western Civ history prof and he introduced me to the concept of using "X-tian" and "Xtain"; this is honestly the first time I had ever seen it described as a putdown. Of course, I would never bother to go to a Richard Dawkins website much as he is highly overrated.
Sorry, I but see no reason why we should ban the term.
Personally, I find this offensive and disrespectful. It is Babble policy to avoid hateful and insulting terminology, which this clearly is.Clearly hateful and insulting terminology? Xian and Xmas as terms were in common use by the 15th century at the latest. They were created by Xians as they used X as the symbol for the word christ and it saved time and space. Persecution complex much?
In fairness to the OP, that history is not necessarily known by many Christians. Growing up, in my church we were often told that X-mas was an attempt by secular humanists to expunge Christ from Christmas.
I use "Xn" myself.
I always use the term "Christian" because I took typing in Grade 9, and it's just as easy for me to use the full word.
But on the other hand, my inner narrator's voice "says" Christian in Charles Laughton's voice from 1935's "Mutiny on the Bounty".
It's a thing. I do.
I'm talking about "global power dynamics," obviously a broad and generalizing term. It simply means that in the Western political discourse we currently inhabit, Christianity and Christian secularism are part of the dominant ideology.
But, isn't that just another way of saying that all adherents to Christiantiy (i.e., Xians) are "dominant" and "privileged"?
In fairness to the OP, that history is not necessarily known by many Christians. Growing up, in my church we were often told that X-mas was an attempt by secular humanists to expunge Christ from Christmas.
Freedom 55: did they mention in your church that the "celebration" of Christmas is very recent and that, Catholic and Protestant alike, Christmas celebrations were frowned on well into the 17th century? Or that they were actively supressed by the "Pilgrims" in the New World?
Freedom 55: did they mention in your church that the "celebration" of Christmas is very recent and that, Catholic and Protestant alike, Christmas celebrations were frowned on well into the 17th century? Or that they were actively supressed by the "Pilgrims" in the New World?
Also, I think a lot of Xian celebrations are rooted, in part, in certain pagan traditions that were adopted by the Xian Church (e.g., the timing of Easter being based on the moon phases).
Of course, that isn't all that remarkable because all religious celebrations are human-created and morph over time. But, I find it amusing that many religious adherent seem to think that "pure" forms of this or that religious belief or celebration actually exist.
@ bagkitty
Not just the pilgrims - Cromwell's puritan government banned Christmas along with church weddings because they are not scriptural (and the pagan foundation of Christmas was known then just as much as it is now).
And Sven, I hear what you are saying/ I think the problem is when cultures get territorial about these holidays rather than realizing that no one has a monopoly on them. That doesn't take away from the purity or the meaning.
I actually don't have a problem with christian secularism per se. LIke most cultures it is a two-edged sword. I don't deny the oppression that it has caused, but I wouldn't be too hasty to throw my entire culture in the garbage. And like it or not, it is my culture.
I think Tommy Douglas's take on it was a bit more measured - that the bible is like a bull fiddle on which you can play any tune you want, so he chose social justice.
"X" is the Greek letter [i]chi[/i] - so X is just the "initial" of Christ, or Χριστός (Khristós), meaning the anointed. It is a very proper and ancient usage.
As for "Christian", I'm not certain, but I believe this is a peculiarly Amerixan term.
And speaking of holidays piled on each other, I know Christmas was chosen for Saturnalia, but the only holiday in the liturgical calendar which has any proper time reference to the original story is Easter - because according to the story it happened at passover. Of course passover was based on a story for which we don't know the original date.
In fairness to the OP, that history is not necessarily known by many Christians. Growing up, in my church we were often told that X-mas was an attempt by secular humanists to expunge Christ from Christmas.
Freedom 55: did they mention in your church that the "celebration" of Christmas is very recent and that, Catholic and Protestant alike, Christmas celebrations were frowned on well into the 17th century? Or that they were actively supressed by the "Pilgrims" in the New World?
What I recall is that there was a muted acknowledgment that December 25th did not correspond with the actual date of Jesus' birth; that the date was a co-optation of preexistent pagan festivals; and that the celebration had no basis in scripture. I don't remember ever being told that it had been in and out of fashion at different times.
The only 'pilgrim' I can recall hearing about in church was [i]The Pilgrim's Progress[/i].
I think most religious hollidays happen to fall on or around notable astronomical milestones, like the equinoxes and solstices. Even minor holidays seem to fall near mid points of the seasons. Exceptions during summer? I guess people were too busy in the fields to be partying to much?
Oh Tommy. You're so Northern-Hemispheric.
In fairness to the OP, that history is not necessarily known by many Christians. Growing up, in my church we were often told that X-mas was an attempt by secular humanists to expunge Christ from Christmas.
Freedom 55: did they mention in your church that the "celebration" of Christmas is very recent and that, Catholic and Protestant alike, Christmas celebrations were frowned on well into the 17th century? Or that they were actively supressed by the "Pilgrims" in the New World?
It's true that the puritans tried to get rid of Christmas. As for the rest of it, well, stick to what you know....
Yes, like Catholic monarchs passing edicts enforcing fasting leading up to the event and penalties for non-church attendance. The Catholic encyclopedia can be useful.
No, folk celebrations were what was frowned upon.... anything not solemn enough... as opposed to the puritans trying to stifle the whole thing
Yes, like Catholic monarchs passing edicts enforcing fasting leading up to the event and penalties for non-church attendance. The Catholic encyclopedia can be useful.
Yes, advent used to be a 'penitential season'. I'm not sure what that has to do with anything you've said previously. But, yes, it did.
No, folk celebrations were what was frowned upon.... anything not solemn enough... as opposed to the puritans trying to stifle the whole thing
The puritans were anomalous. It's simplistic and not really accurate to say "folk celebrations were frowned upon".
But, remind me, why are we talking about the history of Christmas? 
cause we are dealing with an OP that seems to come out of the very American.... everyone has always been Christian, and their kind of Christian, and should always be kinda perspective (okay biased take, but you get the idea)
In fairness to the OP, that history is not necessarily known by many Christians.
Hoo boy, I think on second thought I'll just walk away from that one; I have to go feed my brontosaurus.
cause we are dealing with an OP that seems to come out of the very American.... everyone has always been Christian, and their kind of Christian, and should always be kinda perspective (okay biased take, but you get the idea)
I'm not sure I see the connection. Do you mean such people tend not to know much history? I agree with that.
I'm talking about "global power dynamics," obviously a broad and generalizing term. It simply means that in the Western political discourse we currently inhabit, Christianity and Christian secularism are part of the dominant ideology.
But, isn't that just another way of saying that all adherents to Christiantiy (i.e., Xians) are "dominant" and "privileged"?
What they mean is that had they lived in the American south, they'd have ridiculed the religion of slaves and former slaves because Christianity was part of the ideology of the slave owners. Just as now they ridicule the religion of the poor and dispossessed because Christianity is part of the ideology of those who rule.
RosaL.... I was raised Catholic, very Catholic (middle son in a primarily Irish Catholic family).... they were trying to press me into "discovering a vocation" till that pesky atheism thing got in the way... and, at the risk of stereotyping, the myriad of splinter Christian groups that dominate the scene south of the border have always struck me as being wilfully blind to the history of Christianity... all the emphasis on "personal relationship with their saviour" and such -- theologically unsophisticated is another way of putting it. When I hear anything related to "the war on Christmas" or the "persecution of Christians in N. America" or positions about the use of Xian being inherently disrepectful and the like (I wonder what they think of my personal favourite.... "god botherers"?) I have a tendency to assume they are actually coming out of one of those traditions, and I start listing the sects in my mind and asking myself... are they C&M Alliance like Harper, Baptist like Falwell, Pentecostal like Jim and Tammy....
Now, I know it is not a particularly desirable thing I do (hardly "Christian" of me, to use their parlance), but what the hell... having been on the receiving end of their disapproval I don't feel particularly guilty if my manners slip in their presence.
Personally, I prefer verbally sparring with Catholics... the hair-splitting can make Celtic knot-work look like a straight line... and it can be a lot of fun if you are in the mood to play ... but I remain an equal opportunity anti-believer.
I don't think religious belief prevents one from being a "good" person though, I can quite quiet easily come up a with list of very convinced believers in any number of faiths and sects that I think are wonderful role-models and deserving of respect... it's just that I don't think they are the majority of self-identified believers. So if I can twit them with little historical tidbits (in context or not), what can I say other than I can't resist indulging myself.
What they mean is that had they lived in the American south, they'd have ridiculed the religion of slaves and former slaves because Christianity was part of the ideology of the slave owners. Just as now they ridicule the religion of the poor and dispossessed because Christianity is part of the ideology of those who rule.
And Christianity was not the religion of slaves and former slaves? and is not the religion of poor people?
Not saying I don't see the same power dynamic as you do, but I don't think it is quite so cut and dried.
And bagkitty, yes, a religious upbringing is a very handy thing when it comes time to point out a few of the things that are actually in that book they claim to follow.
bagkitty, thanks for the response. I've been known to engage in a bit of 'twiting' myself, on occasion 
I'm sympathetic to the impulse, believe me!
And Christianity was not the religion of slaves and former slaves? and is not the religion of poor people?
Part of my point is that it was and is 
Are you disagreeing? Or agreeing?
I was a bit confused because it seemed like you were saying the opposite. No, I agree with you.
I realize now that I wasn't clear. I often am not, I think, because I express myself very briefly. Sorry about that.
I was a bit confused because it seemed like you were saying the opposite. No, I agree with you.
(edit)
Though I guess I did a bit of nasty generalizing myself with my last reference to "they". Easy to slip into it, unfortunately. Hopefully it is clear who I m refering to.
Hey, no problem...
"X" is the Greek letter [i]chi[/i] - so X is just the "initial" of Christ, or Χριστός (Khristós), meaning the anointed. It is a very proper and ancient usage.As for "Christian", I'm not certain, but I believe this is a peculiarly Amerixan term.
Trying telling this to NA "Christians" is met with blank stares.
And speaking of holidays piled on each other, I know Christmas was chosen for Saturnalia, but the only holiday in the liturgical calendar which has any proper time reference to the original story is Easter - because according to the story it happened at passover. Of course passover was based on a story for which we don't know the original date.
Easter (pronounced EE-Aster) is a Pegan fertility Goddess...most Xtian holidays are over-writes of Pagan ones. Good Friday is about the only one I can't find a pagan version of
It's good to know that when the kiddies are gathered around the Christmas tree on that special morning, they are, on one level, celebrating Yggdrasil, the world tree, or Odin's Horse. There might also be a connexion to Good Friday here, in that Odin is said to have sacrificed himself by hanging himself from Yggrasil.
I know that I hung, on a windy tree, for all of nine nights, wounded with a spear, and given to Óðinn, myself to myself, on that tree, which no man knows, from what roots it runs.
@ Seariosa
Indeed. I knew the Christians didn't get the rabbits and eggs out of the big book . That is a much older European tradition
@ al=Q
I have also heard that part of the Yule connection with evergreens is because that is where the souls of ancestors went spend the winter.
I have also heard that part of the Yule connection with evergreens is because that is where the souls of ancestors went spend the winter.
I thought that was the reasoning behind bringing wreaths into the home and hanging on doors.
I have also heard that part of the Yule connection with evergreens is because that is where the souls of ancestors went spend the winter.
I thought that was the reasoning behind bringing wreaths into the home and hanging on doors.
Yup, that's what I meant,
