Kevin's Watch

Excellent post Fist.

yes it was.

I'm jumpin' on the peace train! Nice post, Fist.

Cybrweez wrote:Dromond, I'm confused, are you saying Christians have a habit of doing whatever they want at someone's funeral, and disrespecting their wishes?

Do Christians have that habit? No. (I said some Christians practice the disrespect of acting like they know more than said man has just spent his lifetime living and being. And summarily dismissing it.)

History is replete with this showing of disrespect.

Please read what I posted carefully. If you did you wouldn't be confused.

Dromond wrote:I'm jumpin' on the peace train! Nice post, Fist.

'Cause out on the edge of darkness...

Thanks, folks.

Fist, sure, if everyone took the tack that their religion is best for them, w/o forcing it on anyone, the world would be more peaceful. Not peaceful, b/c religion isn't the only cause of violence (altho many seem to think so).

As for creating hard feelings, you're post sounds so great on the face of it, as many here seem to think so. But like I've said, if the alcoholic I care about thinks I'm creating hard feelings by talking about his problem, it doesn't bother me, I feel like I'm helping him. I could only imagine many of you would say, well, better not bother him anymore. That may be OK for you, and you'll create less hard feelings, and also more harm.

And specifially for Christians, Jesus said He came to bring a sword, and don't be surprised when the world persecutes and hates you. Do you know why? Because many times, when you act in love, people don't like it. Love is not creating wishy washy feelings.

Dromond, I guess you didn't understand my question. Whether some Christians disrespect funeral wishes' of others or not, I don't know (haven't studied this in history class myself). Is this only among some Christians, and no one else?

Cyberweez:

It seems a different question to me, so a different answer would in order.

As far as I know, Christians are the only ones who do this, but probably not. I may be wrong. But seeing as how I used to be a Christian, and am now an Atheist, these are the only two parts of the spectrum of the God thing I'm familiar with.

As far as the alcoholic analogy to Fist, this is exactly what I and others have been stating, that you as a Christian feel my desire to not be a Christian is a 'problem' I have.
Mostly it is this sense of superiority than can be so exasperating.

I've tried it on, and it doesn't fit. I know what's best for me.

Dromond wrote:As far as the alcoholic analogy to Fist, this is exactly what I and others have been stating, that you as a Christian feel my desire to not be a Christian is a 'problem' I have.
Mostly it is this sense of superiority than can be so exasperating.

Exactly. You may be right, Cyberweez, that the belief that your way is the only way and the belief that many different ways are equally valid are equally arrogant. But viewing non-Christian and alcoholic in the same light is a lot more insulting to me than I imagine "I'm glad you found a path that fulfills you, even if it's not the same path I follow" is to you.

Hate to break this to you guys, but it's not just the jews who are in immortal peril.

Pope asserts Catholic primacy

By NICOLE WINFIELD
The Associated Press

Pope Benedict XVI said other Christian churches are defective.

LORENZAGO DI CADORE, Italy — Pope Benedict XVI reasserted the primacy of the Roman Catholic Church, approving a document released Tuesday that says other Christian communities are either defective or not true churches and Catholicism provides the only true path to salvation.

Good thread, btw. It really took off after I stopped monitoring it on the second page.

Cail, thanks for the prayers. I accept them in the spirit that they're offered. Other people might not, though, as it conflicts with their religious beliefs (including religious non-beliefs). Imagine offering a Jew a ham and cheese sandwich because he looks hungry.

As for christians and the dead... I was raised Mormon (and probably consider myself Mormon in a similar manner to non-practicing Jews considering themselves Jews). Yep, we baptize the dead. All of 'em. Works out pretty well for them by Mormon standards. They go to the afterlife with clean souls (only the mediocre heaven, though. the good one's still hard to get to). And then there's Phelps' crew which goes to soldiers' funerals to declare their religious belief that they died because 'God hates...' *shrug*

Es, I was laughing out loud at God saying 'WTF?'

at least someone got it...... and you really have to inflect the words for the full effect, heh


this I like:

Syl wrote:Imagine offering a Jew a ham and cheese sandwich because he looks hungry.

Syl wrote:Cail, thanks for the prayers. I accept them in the spirit that they're offered.

You're quite welcome Syl.

Syl wrote:Other people might not, though, as it conflicts with their religious beliefs (including religious non-beliefs). Imagine offering a Jew a ham and cheese sandwich because he looks hungry.

OK, but what if said Jew is starving to death, and all you have to offer is a pork roast? The intent of the offer is still altruistic, and the offerer has no responsibility for the offeree's reaction to said offer.

IOW, I can choose to be offended by anything I want, whether it's a joke at the expense of Christianity, an offered prayer, or the offer of a steak dinner on a Friday during Lent. I believe that it's silly to get bent about those things, because none of them have any negative effect on me whatsoever.

amazingly, i'm still in agreement with you on this one C-man.

its choices we make.


whats the point in being offended by a prayer. unless, of course, you think the prayer might work?

Cail wrote:

Syl wrote:Cail, thanks for the prayers. I accept them in the spirit that they're offered.

You're quite welcome Syl.

Syl wrote:Other people might not, though, as it conflicts with their religious beliefs (including religious non-beliefs). Imagine offering a Jew a ham and cheese sandwich because he looks hungry.

OK, but what if said Jew is starving to death, and all you have to offer is a pork roast? The intent of the offer is still altruistic, and the offerer has no responsibility for the offeree's reaction to said offer.

IOW, I can choose to be offended by anything I want, whether it's a joke at the expense of Christianity, an offered prayer, or the offer of a steak dinner on a Friday during Lent. I believe that it's silly to get bent about those things, because none of them have any negative effect on me whatsoever.

Cail, I do agree. We choose what will offend us. I'd rather eat a pork sammich when I'm starving, or a Philly steak during Lent.

We are all too sensitive.

If we could give it all up it would be grand. But it won't happen.

I'm not trying to be combative here, just saying that I guess we should live and let live a little more than we do.

Honestly, I don't know why we can't.

I give myself as the perfect lack of a good answer.

I'll listen.

On my drive home yesterday, I was thinking about a guy I used to be on the ship with. Bond. We called him Pastor Bond. He was a young guy (not so young that he didn't have a wife and kid), and pretty cool, but... He was pretty religious. We're all sailors and we cuss like it, but Bond would always give you the look if you said 'G**damn' or 'Jesus.' So even though we didn't believe in blasphemy, we tried not to say it around him, or if we did, we'd apologize. Not because we thought he was right or we were wrong, just out of respect. *shrug*

Good post Dromond.

On the other hand, there are certain actions that undoubtedly merit offense taken. I may not be a religious person, but I do not think this matter is "silly." I think that any truly religious Jew or non-Catholic Christian has a right to be pissed off at the Roman Catholic Church, especially Benedict XVI, who has decided to push the interfaith dialogue that John Paul II started, back a few decades.

:::first time reading this thread, sorry for responding to old posts:::

Lord Mhoram wrote:There's something spiritually offensive to a Christian about Judaism when he prays for a Jew's conversion to a different faith.

:shrug:

LM, I've had LDS friends tell me they did whatever it is they do with all their geneological research for the souls of the dead (some form of belief that they can have the dead be "saved" after the fact I believe) for me, as they know I will not seek it myself. I am not offended by it at all; in fact I see it as an expression of their concern for me and am honored they wanted to assure themselves of my eternal well being.

It does not mean that I have to accept as truth what they did. I guess I'll find out on the other side.

Marvin wrote: I doubt you were addressing me but i have no problem with you praying to save my soul, or any other prayer. As far as I'm concerned I want to keep all my bases covered. And if, god forbid, you get up there before me you could always put in a good word.

I'd most definately do the same for you.

Well said, Tazz.

danlo wrote:I believe in God (or some form of God) but my soul really isn't anyone else's business-that's between me and whatever I chose to call God. And don't get me started on the Mormons...

Uh-oh...

danlo, please know I wrote what I first said long before I got to your post...

Avatar wrote:From what I can see, and again as Cail points out, the intentions are for this to help the Jews (in that nebulous way that prayer is supposed affect the world), not to harm them. If we're strict about it in fact, it's supposed to preserve them from the harm that comes by not being Catholic.

So while I can totally see why Jews might be offended by it, I think they're just reacting emotionally to it.

*nodding*

It's amazing to me that these Jewish groups are being so adamant about being offended. This prayer has not even been a topic of conversation at my shul. What Jews are they representing? Certainly not any I know.

DukkhaWaynhim wrote:Now, whether they are deeply offended, or merely maintaining public posturing, I have no idea...

*biting lip*

:::not going to go there:::

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.

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.

Again, why take offense even at the posthumous induction? The only reason to be offended would be if all views of the afterlife are true, and you were then forcibly moved from one to another. But, if only one view is true (or none), would it not be better to cover your bases?

Lord Mhoram wrote:Prebe,
If anyone is aware of a religion that says that all faiths are capable of leading to salvation, and that conversion is therefore completely unnecessary, I would be very interested in seeing that.

Uhm...is it Bhuddism or Taoism...or did I imagine such is in either doctrine...

Cail wrote:

Syl wrote:Imagine offering a Jew a ham and cheese sandwich because he looks hungry.

OK, but what if said Jew is starving to death, and all you have to offer is a pork roast? The intent of the offer is still altruistic, and the offerer has no responsibility for the offeree's reaction to said offer.

Keep in mind, the law of the land always supercedes Jewish Law, if after all attempts to get exemptions fail. Same goes with the sanctity of Life. If a Jew is starving, literally starving to death, and the only food available is non-kosher, it is no sin in the eyes of HaShem for him to partake of it. One thing that always comes into the ruling of rabbinical religious exemptions are matters of prolonging life itself.

(In rereading my post after making my way through the entire thread, I hesitate to send it as it seems so uninformed. But...WTH)

Why be pissed? The Pope is merely stating what the RCC has always believed. It's not like their arguements dropped out of the sky one day. He's not damning persons from other faiths, he's only stating their official positon that theirs is the best way to achieve salvation.

The other Protestant and Orthodox Churches are well aware of the RCC's positon and have their own arguements against it.

All in all I think all this over the Pope's statement is much ado about nothing.

Good post, Menolly.

Damelon, the fact that Benedict is restating Church doctrines doesn't make it any more defensible. As I said, John Paul II was tacitly recanting some old Church teachings, such as this one. Benedict XVI has made the foolish mistake of not only restating those teachings, but strengthening them. As for why be pissed? Oh I don't know. Maybe because some people don't want to be Catholics and don't want to be prayed for and might see this as an insult to their faith.