Talk:Fast-food Christianity

So what would be sold in the Xn Fast Food chain?

Interestingly, there is a Christian fast food chain, and it serves really delicious chicken. (Chick-Fil-A.) Researcher (talk) 17:59, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I used to work for Chick Fil-A, and I enjoyed the Sundays off. Also, In-n-Out Burgers has Biblical passages on their packaging. Aboriginal Noise ^{Oh, what a lovely tea party!} 18:45, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Wow, I'd forgotten about that. --Edgerunner⁷⁶_{Your views are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter} 19:25, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Stupid question...

...but what is that? Who calls it "fast food Christianity"? What specific evidence is there of people doing this? What really differentiates it to "normal" Christianity or the forms we already talk about? In short, is this a real thing or for the deletion pile? ^narchist 14:04, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

• Tozer Devotional, Devotions, "Fast Food" Christianity
• Fast Food Christianity
• Fast Food Christianity
• Fast Food Christianity
• Fast Food Christianity
• Fast Food Christians

Proxima Centauri (talk) 14:38, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Um, this is rather bullshit, written by people who simply hate religion. No religion, even the sickest of teh christian churches, ONLY cares about tithe. Can we at least be somewhat honest. I've never heard teh term, used in the manner that 'cafeteria xians' is used. but if it's used, it is. let's at least be honest if it's a snarl word.--Godot What do cats dream about? 16:15, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I think the original author got it from the text below:-

Fast Food Christianity is consumer-oriented Christianity that treats churchgoers as customers and is oriented toward pleasing them rather than toward remaining true to the Gospel. Since "the customer is always right," a fast-food Christian church waters down its message so as not to scare off its congregants (or their tithes), often taking care to rebuke only other people for their sins.

See Also

Cafeteria Christianity

References

[1]

Proxima Centauri (talk) 18:28, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

For god's sake, did anyone read any of these articles? What we have written about FFC is not at all how these christians are using the term. They are talking about deep substance vs. feel happy Christianity; about the difference between a life of devotion and "Christers". God we are a judgmental lot around here.--Godot What do cats dream about? 16:18, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, I haven't had a chance to read any of them, yet. ^bomination 16:21, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I've never heard the term before, but I'm guessing it's supposed to be a play on "cafeteria Christian." Could be a decent article on televangelist/megachurch-style hucksterism if expanded, I guess. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 16:28, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Not you, the authors of this article who are "all about the simplification and hate". apparently, it's ONLY about money to our authors here, so they are missing a far deeper issue stated by the authors of the articles PC cited. it's not about money, it's about substance, value, and even in some ways 'health' of the person's soul exactly how we talk about Fast Food. but our authors are just on to "oh, they want to make money". Sighs. i am not a religious person, but even I get that - like the PBS begathons - all non profits have to ask for money. you have to pay staff, replace furnaces, repane walls. most churches, mega churches aside, are not making money. grrr. ok, sorry. whiny today.Godot What do cats dream about? 16:29, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Neb - cept it's totally NOT that group of people. It's any church that isn't as "tough" as you want them to be. Granted, mega churches have *some* aspects of this, but they are often the ones telling others how hard it is to be christian, and what kind of devotion you need. To me, it seems like our original author had a bone to pick with how *some* other churches choose to preach, and then attached the $$$ to it. Godot What do cats dream about? 16:32, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I looked through a couple of the articles -- I see what you mean. It looks similar in usage to cafeteria Christian as an epithet for No True Christian. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 16:51, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I've written at length on this topic in the "new age" circles, where they steal the easy and fun parts of buddhism but not the really hard (isolate yourself and don't speak for 12 years, or sit on your knees for 2 days straight, or give up all food but rice) parts of buddhism. It's the american "consumer culture". we want easy, preprocessed foods, games, even pets and pet clean up devices. So much so that the work which is at the core of most things - where a real skill or effort makes the entire project so fulfilling is just stripped out. "Look ma, I made shrimp linguini by just cutting the tab and tossing it in the micro. Aren't I proud?" We pander to the least common denominator - but i don't really think it's as much about money as the author thinks it is. I think it's just "who we've become" as americans. hopefully, that attitude stops at our border, but i'm doubtful. And it's very much part of 'no true scotsman'.Godot What do cats dream about? 17:01, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I came back to this after about 6 months and now I’ve thought things through and started to research so I can put down what concerns me.

1. You suggest that isolating oneself and not communicating for extended periods of time is praiseworthy. People with autism or other conditions that make communication difficult are sometimes active on the Internet. If such people are encouraged to isolate themselves and avoid communication for long periods some might act on this suggestion. Especially if told that not doing such hard things makes them lazy and unworthy some might act on your suggestion and that could seriously aggravate their condition.
2. You suggest that sitting on ones knees for 2 days straight is praiseworthy. I assume you mean Seiza rather than kneeling. Seiza can cause problems for elderly people or people with some injuries and diseases, Japanese culture has discrete ways of dealing with this. Too much kneeling can cause or aggravate arthritis, see Kneeling to Much Increases Arthritis, see also Kneeling, standing on the job boost arthritis risk. Does kneeling or doing seiza for 2 days without a break increase the risk of arthritis? We know too much kneeling can have this harmful effect but I doubt if enough westerners have done prolonged seiza so we can tell. Scientific studies are more likely to be in Japanese or other oriental languages than in English. Still ordinary people who aren’t blinded by too much respect for religion should see intuitively this practise is unnatural. I guess at best it does little good and at worst it could cause disabling harm. Westerners should on no account be encouraged to do anything like prolonged kneeling/seiza except when supervised by an oriental master who knows any risks. Oriental masters might imagine spiritual benefits are worth risks to health, therefore atheists who don’t believer in these spiritual benefits shouldn’t do this or encourage this at all.
3. You suggest that eating only rice is praiseworthy. What do buddhist's eat for meals? I haven’t found confirmation that any Buddhists eat only rice, indeed I suspect such a diet without vitamin supplements would lead to life threating deficiencies within months. As with the suggestion above I feel no westerner should attempt this except when supervised by an oriental master who knows how long the diet may be safely maintained and what supplements may be needed. Are the faithful told about supplements? Of course the rice only diet may be an urban legend. Proxima Centauri (talk) 18:38, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

What Godot wrote here was unecessarily hard to understand and I'm glad it was taken out. Some intellectual material has to be hard to understand. None the less when material is unecessarily hard to understand that serves no useful purpose in my opinion. Unecessarily obscure language can drive readers away who are not part of the intellectual Ivory tower. Academics may like that but the rest of us probably don't.

There always have been people who enjoyed complicated recipes without going to the trouble to cook themselves, they could afford to get other people to cook for them in restaurants or employed cooks. Today people get these complicated dishes by opening a packet, it's far cheaper than it used to be and many people can afford that type of food. Proxima Centauri (talk) 18:47, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

... Тy^{Please do not click on this} 19:03, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

It was actually pretty basic. Maybe your claims of being able to write "educated English" don't extend to being able to read it, Proxima? P-Foster Talk "Armed with the knowledge of our past we can charter a course for our future"--MX 20:51, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Listener X changes

LX, your changes are too assuming in scope. There is no such thing as "fast food christianity" so it cannot focus on gospel over law, and I've not read anything that would claim it does. You also removed Foster's important comments about FFC being one of many things in western society that have become commodities and "easy and simple", which is in the end, the single most important issue here. Religion becoming the same as micky d's is to food. -- Godot On a perdu le contrôle 06:39, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

...so it cannot focus on gospel over law, and I've not read anything that would claim it does. Here is just one example. I have also read a number of neo-Puritan musings on the subject.

You also removed Foster's important comments... I think those comments are complete dreck — people have always sought easier ways to do things, and philosophers and prophets have always blasted society for being too superficial and shallow. "Consumerist Western culture" is really just a modern phrasing of what the King James Bible calls "the world." ListenerX^TalkerX 07:12, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Take care ListenerX, what you wrote was reasonable but Godot, P-Foster, The would be Tyrant and others could be just waiting for an excuse to go for you the way they go for me. Proxima Centauri (talk) 16:04, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Nah. People might disagree with LX, but they rarely have to clean up after him. P-Foster Talk "Armed with the knowledge of our past we can charter a course for our future"--MX 16:07, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

The pastor needs tythe money to keep his church running and avoid unemployment, that's not the whole story but it should be mentioned, see this earelier version. What goes onto the collection plate isn't the whole story but it shouldn't be overlooked either. Proxima Centauri (talk) 16:11, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

""Fast Food Christianity" is a term used to refer to "consumer-oriented" variants of Christianity that stick fast to only one tenet of that religion, viz., the idea that Christians are required to tithe significant portions of their income to the church." Find someone--preferably prominent someones, or lots of someones--using the term that way, and put it in the article, then. P-Foster Talk "Armed with the knowledge of our past we can charter a course for our future"--MX 16:14, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

I wrote that paragraph. It was my "original research," based on my observations of the sort of consumer-oriented, hucksterish churches described as "fast-food" (one of which was actually labeled, on its entrance awning, "House of Worship & Coffee Bar"). There was barely any Christianity discernible in their teachings, but on the question of the tithe they did not budge an inch. ListenerX^TalkerX 04:35, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

"Speculation," "not a real thing," etc.

The paragraph that is being repeatedly deleted from this article on the grounds that it is "speculation" about something that is "not a real thing" makes no reference to any kind of facts; it is concerned solely with ideas. There are certainly commonalities between the beliefs described as "fast-food Christianity" and the beliefs described as "cafeteria Christianity," even if those terms are just snarl words and nobody actually holds the beliefs they describe. ListenerX^TalkerX 04:41, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Then rewrite it in a way that makes it clear that the section is talking about descriptions of beloiefs and not actual beliefs. Theory of Practice "I never set out to hit anybody. It's just that a lot of people got hit." -- Andy Roberts 04:46, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Modern people make effort to do things well.

I'm not getting into an edit war over this but this shouldn't have been reverted. Look at the way we work hard on this website and argue interminably about how the wiki should be. That shows modern people don't expect easy rewards all the time. Many of us are prepared to work hard for what we care about. Proxima Centauri (talk) 17:18, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, yes we do, but what's it got to do with Fast-food Christianity? And are you implying that, before modern times, people didn't work hard to achieve what they wanted? Sophie^Wilder 17:23, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

What's that got to do with the price of fish?

Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 19:36, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Godot and some Christians believe modern people want easy rewards and Fast-food Christianity is part of that trend. As so often Godot and I disagree.

1. Many of us want easy rewards in some areas including religion and cookery.
2. Modern people often want new challenges that weren't available in the past like learning computer and Internet skills. Proxima Centauri (talk) 17:28, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

It should have been reverted on the simple principle that the writing is atrocious and virtually indecipherable. Theory of Practice "Trampoline" is an Olympic sport now? 17:32, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

^This is why most of your stuff is reverted. Тy^{Ask me about frog-backed securities} 17:33, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Dear gods, that edit was virtually indecipherable. It's on par with "The transitional animal the flying kitty?" Blue (is useful) 19:30, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

(EC) Sure, some people want a challenge and to push themselves (there's some kind of thing going in London about that), but most people just want to have an easier life. For every person in an evening class, there are a hundred watching the telly. Sophie^Wilder 17:35, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Proxie, jump in a lake. Your need to try to create a battle where there is none, is getting quite old. The line "there is a trend" is actually not mine, for what it's worth, though I agree. It is not just something we said to annoy you, or to make Christians look good or bad (would have thought you wanted them to look bad). Modern society **is** a throwaway, fast reward for little work society. this has been documented and studied. There are always individual exceptions, but we as westerners (and really, most of the world) have become increasingly superficial and lazy. Technology fuels it, of course, but it's the very "right" of a privileged society which no one can doubt the generalized "west" is. If you do not know 1) what you are trying to say, 2) why it matters, and 3) if it's even a fact, then quite making things up to try to put something into this article. You've changed what you've said 3 times, just to try to get around people who are saying "nope", which leads me to think you are pulling it out of your butt, rather than the fact that you actually have looked at what you are writing and asked yourself those three questions. GodotL'important c'est d'aimer 19:15, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I might jump into a lake, after all I can swim. I would make sure it's safe to jump in first. Very seriously though, how does Godot get away with suggesting that other people kill themselves? If I wrote anything like that the whole community would be down on me and the moderators would tell me to stop. Proxima Centauri (talk) 02:46, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Commented out section

I commented out the "harm section". I tried to rewrite it several times, and can't really come up with something accurate. I'm simply not sure how we can frame it, though i get the point. There is no such thing as a fast-food christian, there is something others say "that's a fast food christian", so it's odd to suggest that the don't have all these moral problems of other churches. As for the 2nd quote, it's interesting information, but pretty heavy for an opening quote.Godot She was a venus demilo in her sister's jeans 22:05, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Like with our article on "sophisticated theology" this article is problematic because there is a gap between one user who seems to think these things actually exist, and a larger, reality-based community, who understand that these are just snarl words, and that since they don't really exist, you can't really write articles about them. Theory of Practice Still tryin' to figure it all out. 23:50, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

I think fast food Christianity is a real social phenomenon though a bit amorphous. Critics see people as fast food Christians though people don't see themselves that way. The pastor at a fast-food church probably knows what he's presenting but won't drive congregants away by pointing it out. Proxima Centauri (talk) 07:07, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I love it. A person who hates Christianity and Christians has a strong opinion on the quality of the Christianity practiced by some particular churches. Theory of Practice Still tryin' to figure it all out. 14:17, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Tozer devotional quote

The website from which the quote at the top was taken goes on to say that American advertising companies made tea and coffee "known to most of the civilized world." Utter bollocks. Since they can't get a known historical fact right, can the quote we've borrowed therefore be taken seriously? Sophie^Wilder 17:19, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Origins of FFC

1 John 4:7-21 - God is love etc - when we should all be considering Old Nick's middle name. Anna Livia (talk) 16:28, 4 June 2019 (UTC)