Religious Intolerance

[drmomentum[$]]

Does religious intolerance have it's place in a well-functioning society? Religious intolerance was a staple fo the group formerly in control of Afghanistan, but we have intolerance everywhere in some form or another. It makes sense that there is going to be a preference for one's own traditions and beliefs, but how far does it need to go until it becomes intolerance?

How much tolerance do we need?

-JP

[poseidon]

If you belong to a religion that subscribes to it being the single right way, as Christianity and Islam are, then you're going to have some sort of intolerance out there.

I can be tolerant of your right to practice your own religion (or lack thereof) so long as it doesn't interfere with my own freedom to practice mine.

EXAMPLE 1: Santeria is a religion that involves animal sacrifice. When I grew up in Miami, many of the immigrants there practiced Santeria. In some areas, they were stealing animals to sacrifice and to practice their religion freely.

While I dislike the notion of animal sacrifice and would resist the idea of participating in it, I certainly wouldn't stop someone from going out, raising their own animals (or purchasing them) and sacrificing them to their gods in the name of religion. However, I do become very intolerant with the idea that they'd come over, pick up Oscar, and try to sacrifice him to their gods. At that point, I'd be exercising my Second Amendment rights and would sacrifice that person to his own gods.

EXAMPLE 2: Most Christian churches subscribe to the idea that the only way into heaven is believing that Jesus is the Son of God and that He died on the cross for your sins. There is no secondary way into heaven.

You can tell me all day long that it is intolerant of me to believe that, and can go on to say that you refuse to believe that God would be that cruel to humans who are good people yet don't believe. My religious intolerance is going to say that you've got a right to your opinion no matter how incorrect it is. I will not agree with you that people who do not believe in Jesus will go to heaven because it goes against the entire foundation of my religion.

But, it is important to realize that there is an intolerance of people who do not wish to be exposed to religion. While not all atheists/agnostics are intolerant folks, just like there are pushy Christians there are also pushy atheists.

It kind of goes all ways. I think that most people are willing to accept that there are differences of opinion regarding religions and religious views of the people within those religions (and for the sake of this discussion, I will say that atheists and agnostics are tossed into their own religion). The big deal becomes when your exercising of your religion directly interferes with the exercise of my own.

[frazzledspice]

Poseidon said: EXAMPLE 2: Most Christian churches subscribe to the idea that the only way into heaven is believing that Jesus is the Son of God and that He died on the cross for your sins. There is no secondary way into heaven.
____________________________________________________

I have no doubt that that's true of your religion, Jeff, and it was true of mine when I was a little girl (actually, it was even more stringent--you had to be Catholic.)

Unbaptized babies and other unbaptized decedents all went to "limbo" where they had only imperfect happiness--deprived of the presence of God.

Sometime after Vatican II, Catholicism eliminated the concept of limbo, which, in real terms, meant that unbaptized people COULD go to heaven. Not only Catholics or other Christians, but everyone.

Since, in global terms, Catholicism is probably the largest Christian religion, most Christians don't feel they hold the only keys to the kingdom.

As far as intolerance goes, I am tolerant of almost everything except intolerance (and bad liturgical music.)

[hadassahchana[$]]

I can be tolerant of your right to practice your own religion (or lack thereof) so long as it doesn't interfere with my own freedom to practice mine.

This was the first thing I thought of, I'm glad you brought it up.

My biggest question is, does any religious group have the right to prevent another from the practice of its religion?

We could use abortion rights, or gay rights, either of those questions seems to be related to some peoples' religious beliefs.

However, even if I woke up one morning and decided to run for public office on an anti-pork platform, do I have the right to try and influence public policy because of my religion?

Or, do I instead have the right not to eat pork, but the obligation not to try and force others to conform to my beliefs?


Cindy

[frazzledspice]

That's a thorny issue, Cindy, and, although it almost never involves anything as simple as eating pork, it can derail the careers of many politicians.

In the case of abortion, for example. My own personal political hero, Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, former neighbor in NY, ran for Congress after her husband was murdered and son wounded by crazed LIRR gunman Colin Ferguson. A few months later she was incensed to learn that her Republican Congressman on Long Island was in the pocket of the NRA.

She ran for Congress as a Democrat on a stricter gun laws platform. She did, however, support abortion choice, even though she was a Catholic and a nurse. Obviously, she was in a tight place. If she didn't give lukewarm support to pro-choicers, the LI Democrats wouldn't support her, and the Republicans had their gun buddy running. She wanted to save lives. She wanted to prevent other families from experiencing the heartbreak that she and other victims of crime experienced.

Political parties almost never set up their platform based on religious issues. Republicans call themselves pro-life when they are actually pro-birth, with myriad anti-life views to their credit (the pistol in every pocket philosophy for one, their social policies for another.)

It's not the Democrats in this state who are trying to take away Medicaid for children with catastrophic medical needs whose parents don't meet Medicaid standards otherwise...it's the pro-birth Republican governor.

Anyway, at the risk of getting off topic, I think that office-holders should let their conscience guide them, knowing that their conscience is formed, in part, by their religious beliefs, and then they should try to do the most good they can.

[AuntieEmma[$]]

This is sort of off the main topic, unless you want to say my questions themselves are intolerant and therefore demonstrate an on-topic answer to the original question, but ... I'm just really curious:

Originally posted by poseidon
EXAMPLE 2: Most Christian churches subscribe to the idea that the only way into heaven is believing that Jesus is the Son of God and that He died on the cross for your sins. There is no secondary way into heaven.

Okay, this is what I'm curious about:

(1) What happens to all the people who lived before Jesus? They couldn't have believed in him, because they had no way of knowing he was going to exist in the future. Do they get some sort of a break, since their disbelief could not be considered in any way their fault or even their choice? Or do they have to go to hell anyway?

(2) Are there any alternatives to heaven and hell? Is there something like the limbo Frazzled mentioned Catholics used to believe in? Or is there a nicer part of hell, for the people I was describing above, who lived before Jesus, or for others who lived after and were good people even though they weren't Christians? Or does everybody get stuck spending eternity in the same room as Jeffry Dohmer?

(3) What happens to your family? Ok, this is really none of my business, but I'm curious: What made you choose to follow a branch of Christianity that would doom your family and childhood friends to eternal hell? Was that a difficult thing to accept at first?

(4) Is the belief in heaven and hell literal or metaphoric? Is it a belief that being a Christian will enable one to live a more fulfilled life, eternal or otherwise, or is it a belief that non-Christians will literally be burned and subject to other painful tortures for eternity?

I really am sincere in asking these questions. I guess they do sound intolerant, but I'm very curious about what the answers might be.

[poseidon]

Originally posted by AuntieEmma (1) What happens to all the people who lived before Jesus? They couldn't have believed in him, because they had no way of knowing he was going to exist in the future. Do they get some sort of a break, since their disbelief could not be considered in any way their fault or even their choice? Or do they have to go to hell anyway?

Do they get some sort of "break?" Yeah, they do to a point. They have to have followed God's written law and all the commandments (not just the Ten Commandments). This was the covenant prior to the birth of Jesus. This proved to be too difficult for most people to avoid sinning and God made a new convenant with mankind.

(2) Are there any alternatives to heaven and hell? Is there something like the limbo Frazzled mentioned Catholics used to believe in? Or is there a nicer part of hell, for the people I was describing above, who lived before Jesus, or for others who lived after and were good people even though they weren't Christians? Or does everybody get stuck spending eternity in the same room as Jeffry Dohmer?

I'm not Catholic, so I won't explain "limbo" or perhaps "Purgatory" since I believe in neither. I also have no clue as to whether or not there are deeper depths of Hell and more shallow depths of Hell. All I know is that Hell is not someplace that I choose to reside.

(3) What happens to your family? Ok, this is really none of my business, but I'm curious: What made you choose to follow a branch of Christianity that would doom your family and childhood friends to eternal hell? Was that a difficult thing to accept at first?

Unlike what's been preached to some Muslim "martyrs" as of late, your life choices have no impact on your family's life choices, your friends' life choices, etc. You go to Heaven or Hell based on whatever you choose for yourself. My family, should they choose to not believe that Jesus died on the cross for their sins would go to Hell. It's something that saddens me any time I have to think about it. I pray daily that my folks would see the light, but it is their own choice to make, just as I made my own choice. But I will not condemn myself to Hell just to remain with my family.

As far as my childhood friends, I don't keep track of any of them and frankly have no clue what most of their religious views were anyhow when we were friends (I live about 2500 miles away from where I grew up). As far as choosing a "branch" of Christianity that would doom my family to Hell, I didn't join a "branch." I'm part of mainstream Protestantism.

(4) Is the belief in heaven and hell literal or metaphoric? Is it a belief that being a Christian will enable one to live a more fulfilled life, eternal or otherwise, or is it a belief that non-Christians will literally be burned and subject to other painful tortures for eternity?

I'm not sure how to answer this question... I believe in Heaven and I believe in Hell. I don't see how the belief could be anything but literal.

The idea of "hellfire and brimstone" isn't something that I preach, or even necessarily believe in. So, people who are in Hell might burn, might freeze, or might live in a comfortable 68 degree temperature. I'm not sure what encompasses Hell other than the fact that it is seperation from God for eternity.

I also don't know that a Christian lives a more "fulfilled" life than someone else. Christians aren't perfect and aren't any less sinful than non-Christians. Christians are normal people who hopefully try to live a life that will bring us closer to God rather than push Him away.

[AuntieEmma[$]]

Thanks, Jeff, for answering. I've got some more questions, if you don't mind sticking with this a while longer (and apologies to everyone else for straying off topic):

Do they get some sort of "break?" Yeah, they do to a point. They have to have followed God's written law and all the commandments (not just the Ten Commandments). This was the covenant prior to the birth of Jesus. This proved to be too difficult for most people to avoid sinning and God made a new convenant with mankind.

I was thinking further back -- before the convenant and the written law, back to the pagans and further back to the cavemen and so on -- back maybe even before language. Even then, there must have been some sense of ethics, some people who acted more in a way that we might now call in accordance with God's laws. Some people must have gone out of their way to be kind and to share the boar or whatever it was they ate, while others must have been always nasty and causing trouble. Does that count for anything? Or all they all damned, no matter how they lived?

Unlike what's been preached to some Muslim "martyrs" as of late, your life choices have no impact on your family's life choices, your friends' life choices, etc. You go to Heaven or Hell based on whatever you choose for yourself. My family, should they choose to not believe that Jesus died on the cross for their sins would go to Hell. It's something that saddens me any time I have to think about it. I pray daily that my folks would see the light, but it is their own choice to make, just as I made my own choice. But I will not condemn myself to Hell just to remain with my family.

What makes me really curious about this, is that I've never met anyone before who converted from Judaism to Christianity. It seems like there are a couple of big obstacles, and I wonder how you overcame them.

First obstacle is that there's a very big taboo against Jewish-->Christian conversions. I remember being taught as a kid about all the forced conversions, and the martyrs who said, essentially, "Give me liberty or give me death," and it made a big impression on me. It was a simplified form of history, the kind of stuff they teach to kids, but it stuck with me, and I thought, well if some people were willing to die rather than being forced to convert, it's not something to take lightly, and it's not something I should do voluntarily.

And then there's the social aspect. Most Jewish families, at least the time I was growing up (I think I'm about ten years older than you are), would go ballistic when someone married someone who wasn't Jewish -- and conversion is like ten steps beyond that. That's changed now, to a certain extent, but again it's one of those things that stuck with me, and that I would have to somehow come to terms with if I decided to convert.

The second big obstacle is what we've been talking about, the idea that non-Christians go to hell. I think I could imagine at least the possibility of breaking through the first taboo, but I think if I were in a situation where I was looking at other religions with an eye toward converting, when I got to the part where I learned that non-Christians go to hell, I think I would have to take a pass on that group and keep on looking. Attractive as it might be to imagine that some of my relatives would be spending eternity far, far away from where I was, in all seriousness, I would find that a hard thing to live with -- a few times I've gotten angry and told people to "go to hell," but I didn't really mean it -- and to adopt a religion that does seem to mean it, and to carry that belief with me all the time, would be very uncomfortable. So I would make another choice.

So I wonder how you came to terms with these issues, what you did to get over those barriers, or if perhaps these weren't issues for you at all, so there were no hurdles there that you had to get over.

As far as choosing a "branch" of Christianity that would doom my family to Hell, I didn't join a "branch." I'm part of mainstream Protestantism.

I guess "branch" may be the wrong word. What I meant was that I thought there were a lot of Christians who don't believe that non-Christians are going to hell -- so even within the choice of becoming a Christian, there's a second choice of whether to go with a group that believes non-Christians are doomed or one that doesn't.

I'm not sure how to answer this question... I believe in Heaven and I believe in Hell. I don't see how the belief could be anything but literal.

The idea of "hellfire and brimstone" isn't something that I preach, or even necessarily believe in. So, people who are in Hell might burn, might freeze, or might live in a comfortable 68 degree temperature. I'm not sure what encompasses Hell other than the fact that it is seperation from God for eternity.

Does that include the possibility that people aren't being tortured? So that for people who are living what you might consider to be an ungodly life on Earth, eternity might be more of the same, no better, but no worse?

[jenninca]

I can't answer all of the questions, but I can do this one:

Originally posted by AuntieEmma

(1) What happens to all the people who lived before Jesus? They couldn't have believed in him, because they had no way of knowing he was going to exist in the future. Do they get some sort of a break, since their disbelief could not be considered in any way their fault or even their choice? Or do they have to go to hell anyway?

When I was younger, I asked my mom the same question. (We are Catholic.) I believe that she said that they all had a place to stay (kind of like the limbo Frazz mentioned) until Jesus came. When Jesus went to heaven, they all followed him in.

I never understood types of religions that thought theirs was the only way to get into heaven. As others have said, I just couldn't believe that God would condemn all those other good people to hell. I certainly don't believe that my religion is the only right one; it's just the right one for me.

Cindy

[poseidon]

Originally posted by AuntieEmma
Thanks, Jeff, for answering.

No problem.

I was thinking further back -- before the convenant and the written law, back to the pagans and further back to the cavemen and so on -- back maybe even before language. Even then, there must have been some sense of ethics, some people who acted more in a way that we might now call in accordance with God's laws. Some people must have gone out of their way to be kind and to share the boar or whatever it was they ate, while others must have been always nasty and causing trouble. Does that count for anything? Or all they all damned, no matter how they lived?

I guess that depends on how you view evolution, etc. first of all. My belief system includes Adam and Eve, and when Adam and Eve were created, so was the first covenant with man (Genesis 2:15-17 says, The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. And the Lord God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die." While it wasn't written to Adam, it was definitely spoken by God to Adam (and thus there was language). God made other covenants with man, the next most infamous one was with Noah. When man broke that convenant, others were made, the next most infamous one being with Moses and the Jews. The Jews couldn't keep that covenant. The last covenant given to man was the Perfect Covenant.

While you have asked excellent questions in regard to what happens to man prior to the coming of Christ, those questions aren't ones that I have answers to. Perhaps someone who is learned in this aspect of Judeo-Christian study would be qualified to answer on my behalf.

What makes me really curious about this, is that I've never met anyone before who converted from Judaism to Christianity. It seems like there are a couple of big obstacles, and I wonder how you overcame them.

First obstacle is that there's a very big taboo against Jewish-->Christian conversions. I remember being taught as a kid about all the forced conversions, and the martyrs who said, essentially, "Give me liberty or give me death," and it made a big impression on me. It was a simplified form of history, the kind of stuff they teach to kids, but it stuck with me, and I thought, well if some people were willing to die rather than being forced to convert, it's not something to take lightly, and it's not something I should do voluntarily.

The first thing to remember is that the forced conversions came out of the Catholic Church, not the Protestant Church. In the Spanish Inquisition (probably the most infamous example), they prosecuted and persecuted Jews, Arabs and Protestants... in other words, anyone who wasn't Catholic. There was no love for those who believed in Christ yet wouldn't embrace the Catholic Church (the Protestants). There are far too many important distinctions between Catholics and Protestants to go into detail here. But if you'd care to read more about it, you might want to look at an excellent article on the Spanish Inquisition, which was in force from 1478 to its fall in 1834. The article is located at http://campus.northpark.edu/history/...SpanInqui.html but the aspect of the article can be summed up in its second paragraph that states, The Spanish Inquisition was used for both political and religious reasons. Spain is a nation-state that was born out of religious struggle between numerous different belief systems including Catholicism, Islam, Protestantism and Judaism. Following the Crusades and the Reconquest of Spain by the Christian Spaniards the leaders of Spain needed a way to unify the country into a strong nation. Ferdinand and Isabella chose Catholicism to unite Spain and in 1478 asked permission of the pope to begin the Spanish Inquisition to purify the people of Spain. They began by driving out Jews, Protestants and other non-believers.

The other biggest example would be The Crusades. The Crusades were set up by the Catholic Church (not Protestants) to fight the spread of Islam in Catholic "holy places", or as the Catholic Church preferred to call it, "Mohammedan tyranny of Holy Places." However, it is important to note that while the Catholics engaged in The Crusades until 1669 (under the Duke of Burgandy's crusade to Candia), that Protestants again took no part of this. If you'd like to learn more about the Crusades, you might want to look at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04543c.htm

The second thing to remember is that you're stating that there's "a very big taboo against Jewish-->Christian conversions." That's a somewhat misleading statement. There's a very big taboo against any conversion from Judaism to any other religion. Converting from Jewish to Christian isn't looked down upon any worse than converting from Jewish to Hindu, or Jewish to Wiccan. My guess would be if there were real degrees of insult in the conversion process, perhaps it would be more biting to the Jewish community if someone Jewish converted to Islam, but either way, the real insult is converting from Judaism to anything else.

And then there's the social aspect. Most Jewish families, at least the time I was growing up (I think I'm about ten years older than you are), would go ballistic when someone married someone who wasn't Jewish -- and conversion is like ten steps beyond that. That's changed now, to a certain extent, but again it's one of those things that stuck with me, and that I would have to somehow come to terms with if I decided to convert.

Let's just say that the conversion led to my father not talking to me for almost four years... and that while my mother and father are putting up a brave front now, they're not exactly thrilled with the fact that I'm not marrying a Jew -- so much so that they've requested we not invite any of their friends to the wedding. They've suggested that we have a J.P. (not drmomentum, but a Justice of the Peace) marry us, and they've suggested that we find a non-church environment to have the ceremony. They have given us their blessing for the marriage, however, and I am very thankful for that. Since those initial four years, it has been sometimes a very difficult but rewarding time in rebuilding a relationship with my father especially. My mother was less of a problem.

I've always been a believer in the commandment to "Honor Thy Father and Thy Mother." However, I've also informed them that this is Michelle and my wedding, not theirs. We've not asked them to contribute financially to the wedding (nor have we asked her parents because we feel that we have 100% control of the plans if we are paying for the wedding ourselves). All we've asked is for their presence. We are getting married in a church by our church pastor, and any friends that they have who will be invited are also my friends. I'm not going to be inviting people that only my parents hang out with. I guess it's kind of a compromise (mostly on their end).

What's always been a curiosity to me is that my parents have been very much non-practicing Jews since as long as I can remember. Apparently I was supposed to embrace a religion that they did not. One would think that if it was truly an offense, they would have found a synogogue to attend, yet they stay home each Friday night and Saturday morning, they do not observe any of Jewish tradition, they do not follow koser laws, and they do not even admit to being anything more than agnostic.

The second big obstacle is what we've been talking about, the idea that non-Christians go to hell. I think I could imagine at least the possibility of breaking through the first taboo, but I think if I were in a situation where I was looking at other religions with an eye toward converting, when I got to the part where I learned that non-Christians go to hell, I think I would have to take a pass on that group and keep on looking. Attractive as it might be to imagine that some of my relatives would be spending eternity far, far away from where I was, in all seriousness, I would find that a hard thing to live with -- a few times I've gotten angry and told people to "go to hell," but I didn't really mean it -- and to adopt a religion that does seem to mean it, and to carry that belief with me all the time, would be very uncomfortable. So I would make another choice.

Chrisitans do not want people to go to Hell. That's 100% against the entire religion itself -- we want everyone to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. That's why there is the entire witnessing aspect to the religion -- to spread God's Word and to give as many people the opportunity to hear the God's Word and embrace it.

I can also appreciate when you say that you'd not find the idea attractive that non-Christians would go to Hell and thus you'd want to take a pass on the religion. That's certainly your free will and I wouldn't knock you for having it. And while I have no true description of what exactly encompasses Hell, I've decided it wasn't someplace that I wanted to go. But Christianity is made up of the basis of mankind having free will to determine what each individual will or will not do -- choices that will be made if you will.

C.S. Lewis perhaps expained this best in his work Mere Christianity when he wrote:

God created things which had free will. That means creatures can go either wrong or right. Some people think they can imagine a creature which was free but had no possibility of going wrong; I cannot. If a thing is free to be good it is also free to be bad. And free will is what has made evil possible. Why, then, did God give them free will? Because free will, though it makes evil possible, is also the only thing that makes possible any love or goodness or joy worth having. A world of automata -- of creatures that worked like machines -- would hardly be worth creating. The happiness which God designs for His higher creatures is the happiness of being freely, voluntarily united to Him and to each other in an ecstacy of love and delight compared with which the most rapturous love between a man and a woman on this earth is mere milk and water. And for that they must be free.

Of course, God knew what would happen if they used their freedom the wrong way: apparently He thought it worth the risk. Perhaps we feel inclined to disagree with Him. But there is a difficulty about disagreeing with God. He is the source from which all your reasoning power comes: you could not be right and He wrong any more than a stream can rise higher than its own source. When you are arguing against Him you are arguing against the very power that makes you able to argue at all: it is like cutting off the branch you are sitting on. If God thinks this state of war in the universe a price worth paying for free will -- that is, for making a live world in which creatures can do real good or harm and something of real importance can happen, instead of a toy world which only moves when He pulls the strings -- then we may take it it is worth paying.

Converting isn't exactly a split-second decision (at least it wasn't for me). I wasn't sitting there one minute saying, "Gosh lookie here at this twig on the ground" and then the next minute saying, "Hallelujah! Praise the Lord!" It took some in-depth research, soul-searching, etc. Some people who have been raised in Christian backgrounds are ready to embrace God's Word. Some, like myself, were hostile to the idea until I actually looked into my life, God's Word, and made the decision from there.

So I wonder how you came to terms with these issues, what you did to get over those barriers, or if perhaps these weren't issues for you at all, so there were no hurdles there that you had to get over.

Yes, there were hurdles. There should be hurdles. Everyone needs to take into account who they are and reflect upon their own lives and their own desires. This is a serious and life-long decision that affects every aspect of a person's future. Finding and following God is the most important decision you can make.

I guess "branch" may be the wrong word. What I meant was that I thought there were a lot of Christians who don't believe that non-Christians are going to hell -- so even within the choice of becoming a Christian, there's a second choice of whether to go with a group that believes non-Christians are doomed or one that doesn't.

I'm not going to dictate to people what they should or should not believe, but for a practicing Christian to believe that non-Christians are also going to Heaven is 100% contradictory to the entire idea of Christ. If you believe that Jesus is the Son of God, and that Jesus was sent to earth to die on the cross for man's sin, and that in order for that sin to be forgiven you must believe in that, then how could you possibly be a Christian yet not believe in Christ being the Savior?

Does that include the possibility that people aren't being tortured? So that for people who are living what you might consider to be an ungodly life on Earth, eternity might be more of the same, no better, but no worse?

I suppose it would include the possibility that people aren't being "tortured." I don't exactly embrace the Greek idea of Tartarus (for simple terms, their version of Hell) where people are starved and tied up, only to have food be an inch away from their furthest reach, or for people to be whipped 24/7, etc. I'd consider that torture. However, it is mentioned that eternal seperation from God includes "weeping and the gnashing of teeth." My gathering from that statement is that it isn't exactly a happy place to be.

I would think from that statement that Hell wouldn't simply be existing as you are today -- the same, no better, no worse. My imagination could run wild as to what exactly encompasses Hell. All I know is that I'm choosing to not attend the party.

[frazzledspice]

Historically, many religions have practiced their own forms of intolerance.

The Catholics had some very good teachers--the ancient Romans, who fed some of them (but obviously not all) to the lions.

However, many religions are making strides towards unity--Catholics and Lutherans, for example. They have been engaging in dialogue and have settled some of their differences (having worked with a contemporary choir at a Lutheran church, I was stunned at how simliar the Lutheran service is to the Catholic Mass--even their Apostles' creed was the same, except for saying "the holy Christian church" instead of the "holy Catholic church."

Jesus himself was a wonderful example of religious tolerance--interacting and healing Jews, gentiles, and Samaritans.

My heaven is diverse and inclusive.

As to the Church of Christ minister whom I am in an organization with, who won't allow instruments in his church because they weren't in the Bible, bah, humbug!

[poseidon]

Fraz,

As an former member of the CoC, I have a simple question to ask your pastor-friend.

If the Bible makes no provision for musical instruments in the church, then how does he explain the various Psalms, like Psalm 4, which is written for stringed instruments, Psalm 5, written for flutes, Psalm 6, written for stringed instruments, Psalm 54, written for stringed instruments, Psalm 61, written for stringed instruments, Psalm 67, written for stringed instruments, or Psalm 76, also written for stringed instruments.

I'm also pretty sure that no Christians were fed to the lions by the Romans. I believe that's a common mistake.

Jeff

[AuntieEmma[$]]

And again thanks, Jeff, for sticking with this. BTW, I had thought this would be a delicate topic, but maybe it's not -- in which case, I'll stop being so polite and just plow right in. ;-)

I've always been a believer in the commandment to "Honor Thy Father and Thy Mother."

Do you feel any contradiction between believing that and also believing that your father and mother are going to hell? Does believing they're doomed make it harder to honor them, both now while they're alive, and also in the future to honor their memories after they die? When you talk to them, are you aware that they're doomed, or is that something that you can put out of your mind -- it is something you think about only in church and sometimes on a message board, or is it a thought you carry with you constantly? Or am I way off here, and you approach this in a totally different way?

What's always been a curiosity to me is that my parents have been very much non-practicing Jews since as long as I can remember. Apparently I was supposed to embrace a religion that they did not. One would think that if it was truly an offense, they would have found a synogogue to attend, yet they stay home each Friday night and Saturday morning, they do not observe any of Jewish tradition, they do not follow koser laws, and they do not even admit to being anything more than agnostic.

It sounds like we come from similar backgrounds.

Chrisitans do not want people to go to Hell. That's 100% against the entire religion itself -- we want everyone to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. That's why there is the entire witnessing aspect to the religion -- to spread God's Word and to give as many people the opportunity to hear the God's Word and embrace it.

Is there any aspect of competition here -- that you've found the truth and the rest of your family has not, that you're going to the good place and they don't get to go? Or is there any aspect of anger -- that they're going to hell, and it serves them right? I think that those kinds of feelings of competitiveness and anger are always present in families to at least a slight degree, and I wondered if the religious beliefs hooked into that.

Converting isn't exactly a split-second decision (at least it wasn't for me). I wasn't sitting there one minute saying, "Gosh lookie here at this twig on the ground" and then the next minute saying, "Hallelujah! Praise the Lord!" It took some in-depth research, soul-searching, etc.

So what did inspire you to convert? What was the process?

[hadassahchana[$]]

When man broke that convenant, others were made, the next most infamous one being with Moses and the Jews. The Jews couldn't keep that covenant

This threw me - in fact, we are still keeping it, and in pretty much the same ways as our ancestors did minus the temple rituals. Thos cannot be performed while the temple is not standing, however, the Jews were not the ones who destroyed out temple. Therefore, as far as we're allowed, we keep the laws given to us by G-d, as far as we're concerned- includng that of keeping kosher.


Cindy

[poseidon]

Originally posted by AuntieEmma And again thanks, Jeff, for sticking with this. BTW, I had thought this would be a delicate topic, but maybe it's not -- in which case, I'll stop being so polite and just plow right in. ;-)

Again, no problem. Ask what you'd like.

Do you feel any contradiction between believing that and also believing that your father and mother are going to hell? Does believing they're doomed make it harder to honor them, both now while they're alive, and also in the future to honor their memories after they die? When you talk to them, are you aware that they're doomed, or is that something that you can put out of your mind -- it is something you think about only in church and sometimes on a message board, or is it a thought you carry with you constantly? Or am I way off here, and you approach this in a totally different way?

As I stated in an earlier post in this thread, I pray for my parents daily that they would be receptive to the Christian philosophy. No, I don't feel any problems honoring them when it doesn't contradict my own spiritual and religious needs. I do my best to honor my mother and father daily. We have repaired our relationship to the best extent that it can be repaired right now, and I talk to them every day (they only live 45 minutes away) on the phone. I see them whenever I can. It saddens me that we don't have the same future, but again I will not condemn myself to their future.

Is there any aspect of competition here -- that you've found the truth and the rest of your family has not, that you're going to the good place and they don't get to go? Or is there any aspect of anger -- that they're going to hell, and it serves them right? I think that those kinds of feelings of competitiveness and anger are always present in families to at least a slight degree, and I wondered if the religious beliefs hooked into that.

I don't think that there's any competition. I mean, I don't sit there and go "Neener neener neeeeeeeeeener. I'm going to Heaven and you're not!" It's just the opposite. I don't think it serves them right at all, and I hope that someday they'll be receptive to my religion, especially since they embrace none.

So what did inspire you to convert? What was the process?

It is a long story and a long process that would be too in-depth for this forum, and would likely bore most of the people reading this.

[AuntieEmma[$]]

Again, no problem. Ask what you'd like.

Okay, thanks.

I don't think that there's any competition. I mean, I don't sit there and go "Neener neener neeeeeeeeeener. I'm going to Heaven and you're not!" It's just the opposite. I don't think it serves them right at all, and I hope that someday they'll be receptive to my religion ...

But the chances of that would be none, right? I mean, not even knowing your parents and just making assumptions, even though making assumptions is risky, based on what I do know about American Jews, I think it's a fair bet to say that they're never going to convert to Christianity.

So is there no temptation to gloat? I don't mean out loud, but just to yourself. If I were in your shoes, which of course I'm not, I think that temptation would be there.

... especially since they embrace none. <