Moderator: Fist and Faith
True. It might even be anoying as hell, but I tend to respect people who do it, because it shows me that they care.Lord Mhoram wrote:I actually completely agree with that. Doesn't make it right, or even morally justifiable.
OK, I don't.Lord Mhoram wrote:I believe it's morally unjustifiable. That's my opinion. There is no moral absolute there.
That's nice that you think so, but I think it sounds like your saying this:And nice try, but the inherent flaw I was talking about is the idea that only one faith is absolute. I believe all faiths have something to offer and it is illogical to me that only one offers salvation.
Which is fine to think, as long as you recognize you're no different than me. I think its my way, you think yours. Hence, its why I think the word arrogant carries no meaning in this instance.There's an inherent flaw in thinking one religion is the way. Instead, there's only this way to think: that all religions offer salvation.
Maybe this is the idea that polytheisms that are accepting of other religions tend to get destroyed by monotheisms which aren't?Lord Mhoram wrote:Look, it is a fact that everyone so far in this discussion has acknowledged, that an inherent characteristic of all world religions is the idea that your religion offers either the ideal way, or the only way to salvation. What I am saying is, that the idea that one faith is somehow better than others, is inherently arrogant. That's a truism when considering, for example, nationalism. It's safe to say that a nation that tramples over others because they think they are the superior race is an arrogant nation. A religion that has the gall to pray for the conversion of others to their faith is an arrogant religion.
There's nothing arrogant in my suggestion that all faiths have something to offer. In fact, that's the only really inclusive way to approach religion - They've all got something to say. They might all be right, but who am I or you to pick and choose and rank?
Lucimay, with all due respect, how did I twist your words or meaning here?Lucimay wrote:i understand LM, but here's the deal,
why does anyone WHO'S NOT CATHOLIC have anything to say about what catholics say in THEIR MASS.
far as i can see, it's none of anybody else's business(jew, muslim, atheist, etc) what catholics do or say in the sanctity of their own churches during their own services!!
how come nobody's bitching about THAT??? hmmm???
Cyberweez, it's really not as simple to me as you make it sound.(Regarding the first part of your post, which is the part I'm addressing)Cybrweez wrote:I don't know who would be offended about what would happen to their body after their death. You're dead, you wouldn't know. I think people look for reasons to be offended, now we're taking it to places where we're not even alive yet we're offended.
I heard a good message last night, which I couldn't help but think about this topic. He was talking about Ephesians 2, v1-3
A good way to think of 'walked according to the course of this world', is to imagine a current, and you're just swept along in it. You have no control. This current is according to the prince of the power of the air (Satan). Satan has created this current, and those who are dead are caught in this current. They may think they are in control, but are being swept along (you might say enslaved) by this current. Like the alcoholic, who thinks he's in control until he decides to try to control his addiction, then finds how strong the current is.AND you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins,
Eph 2:2
in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience,
Eph 2:3
among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others.
As a Christian, it is painful to see others caught in this current. To see the enslavement. Would I mention something to the alcoholic? Would I listen to him when he says "get lost"? If so, that's not very loving. He's harming himself, possibly others. But even if only himself, if I care, I won't stop b/c he asks me too, whether he considers it arrogant or not.
But then, verse 4 begins:
What a great 'But.' By His mercy He pulls us out of the current. The pastor last night likened it to a dog on a boat, going against the current, but the dog's not doing anything, just sittin there w/its tongue hanging out.But God
my point was (and maybe i didn't make it well enough, i am frequently inarticulate) that in my opinion, i don't see how it's any business of jews what catholics pray for inside their own churches, just like i don't see how it's the business of catholics what goes on inside a jewish temple. I DID NOT BRING UP ANTI-SEMITISM. and this discussion is not ABOUT anti-semitism.Dromond wrote:And Lucimay, your saying that the Jews have no right to be critical of what the Catholics say about them behind closed doors ignores 1000+ years of anti-Semitism, what they did say about them, in secret and out in the open, and all the agony bestowed upon many of their race by this same group.
Dukkha, good post.DukkhaWaynhim wrote:I had actually mentioned the difference between me saying a prayer for someone at night, versus a group of people conducting a ceremony to retroactively baptize someone who is dead into a faith that they did not express a desire in life to become a part of.Dromond wrote:Tell me the difference of praying for me alive and dead, when your experience tells you I wouldn't appreciate either.
The difference to me is crystal clear, but I will draw it out: one is a wishful prayer or prayerful wish, depending on how much stock you put in prayer. The other is a formal and posthumous induction of someoneinto a faith they had no part of in life. It is NOT just a difference of scale. Totally different things in my mind.
I'm not talking about whether you want to mentioned by me in my prayers. If I'm praying them, they're *my* prayers - and if I am praying for your instant death, your gradual conversion, or that you win the lottery tomorrow, well that's between my conscience and God, isn't it? Whether or not you are told of my prayers is inconsequential to the prayer itself. Do you feel your ears burning or something?
It is 100% your perception and your choice to take it as a sweet nothing, or as a heartfelt wish that (darn it) can't come true because you just don't care for my religion, or an arrogant act by someone who is lording their supposedly superior religion over you. So see it how you will.
Believe me, I know there are plenty of people out there that do believe you and I are going straight to Hell if we don't buy Jesus Brand X. These people are fervently praying their eyes out for our instant and irrevocable conversion. Some people knock door to door trying to find converts. Some people learn foreign languages and travel to distant lands to bring Jesus and food to people who have nothing. Some people have potluck dinners and invite nonmembers for some fellowship, hoping to win them over. Some people pray quietly for the conversion of others. Some people beat their breasts and wail publicly for the soon-to-be-damned souls of the nonbelievers. And some people could care less.
Would it really kill you to find out why the person who is praying for you is praying for you? Try to take it the way it was meant. Or don't. Either way, it's still your choice.
And hey, the offense you all tell us you're taking about a prayer that was made on your behalf just gives us arrogant people more of a chance to talk more about our religion - i.e., more chances to convert you
[Personally, I find hard-sell evangelizing very distasteful, because it's always the fundies that are doing it, and they always seem like they are working from a sales script, just like door-2-door vacuum cleaner salesmen. I think it cheapens the product to sell it that way, because to me it smacks of desperation.]
dw
I didn't think you'd oppose that one.
And I'm still of the sameopinion...that if it doesn't harm anybody, that their (sick and twisted) business. Do you feel offended by hospitals secretly selling your "leftovers" to labs for experimentation? (Hospitals do this every day, and the courts have upheld that we have no right to our own DNA... might make a good topic in the Tank) I know I do. But then, you don't know it's happening, right?I don't know who would be offended about what would happen to their body after their death. You're dead, you wouldn't know. I think people look for reasons to be offended, now we're taking it to places where we're not even alive yet we're offended.
But don't people who pray believe that their prayers are answered? At least occasionally? Why would anyone pray for a particular thing to happen if they knew it wouldn't? If you pray for some specific thing to happen to me, and your God makes it happen, then it is not between your conscience and God; you are deciding what will happen in my life. I don't see how it could be more my business.DukkhaWaynhim wrote:I'm not talking about whether you want to mentioned by me in my prayers. If I'm praying them, they're *my* prayers - and if I am praying for your instant death, your gradual conversion, or that you win the lottery tomorrow, well that's between my conscience and God, isn't it? Whether or not you are told of my prayers is inconsequential to the prayer itself. Do you feel your ears burning or something?
However, one of those ways of thinking leads to a more peaceful coexistence with the huge number of people who don't agree with the way of thinking.Cybrweez wrote:Which is fine to think, as long as you recognize you're no different than me. I think its my way, you think yours. Hence, its why I think the word arrogant carries no meaning in this instance.There's an inherent flaw in thinking one religion is the way. Instead, there's only this way to think: that all religions offer salvation.
There will never be a time when everyone believes the same religion. I, for example, will never believe that Jesus is the only way. My point is that, with lots of people having lots of different beliefs, it would be more peaceful if everybody's beliefs incorporated the idea that the way they believe is simply the way that works best for them. Some of those who believe otherwise insist on forcing their beliefs on others. Some go to war to force their beliefs on others, killing anyone who will not convert and raise their children to believe those things. Others create hard feelings with things like, "You're gonna burn in Hell!", even if said with genuine regret and sorrow. (Which often appears not to be the case. Many seem well pleased at being one of the favored few to have found the only way to salvation, and they appear quite happy to look down on those who "refuse" to see the light.) To tell an 80 yo rabbi, or shaman, or whatever, who has tried his/her best to lead his/her people with love, joy, and tolerance for decades that they are going to Hell cannot lead to any peace.Cybrweez wrote:Fist, which way is more peaceful? Jesus said He is the only way to salvation, the road is narrow. Did He peacefully coexist with others? And as far as I know, I've peacefully coexisted with those around me. And if you believe Jesus is the only way, and He said love others as yourself, then you are "forced" to peacefully coexist with others.
On the other hand, if all religions are equal, the one that says martrydom guarantees salvation, you better not knock it. But, you better watch out.
