M
MiserereMeiDei
Guest
I too wonder how one can respect error. Is that a gift of the spirit?
- Status
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
They’re not something I give too much thought to, so I’m not sure how you can word that.
T
TULIPed
Guest
And so how do you sort that which you can respond to authority with “That’s nice”, and that which you respond with “Amen”?
The Holy Father has called all Christians (including Catholics I presume) to respect the religion of the other. Perhaps this is a bridge to far for some. How does one determine which bridge is too far, and which is one appropriate for crossing I wonder?
The Holy Father has called all Christians (including Catholics I presume) to respect the religion of the other. Perhaps this is a bridge to far for some. How does one determine which bridge is too far, and which is one appropriate for crossing I wonder?
M
MiserereMeiDei
Guest
I don’t mind that you wonder. 
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
These bridges aren’t that neccessary and looks to be a mostly fruitless work.
T
TULIPed
Guest
Fair enough. There are a number of things upon which the Holy Father and I disagree theologically. On this issue I’m happy to report that we’re in violent agreement 
T
TULIPed
Guest
Ah yes. Fruitless bridges. Biblical history is full of them: Nineveh, Samaria, lepers, tax collectors, gentiles, women, etc. etc. The fruitless ones are always very hard to cross too.
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
Different methods were used for those.
T
TULIPed
Guest
Some methods were indeed different (and seemed to be a bit extreme):
“3 Paul wanted to take him along on the journey, so he circumcised him because of the Jews who lived in that area, for they all knew that his father was a Greek. 4 As they traveled from town to town, they delivered the decisions reached by the apostles and elders in Jerusalem for the people to obey. 5 So the churches were strengthened in the faith and grew daily in numbers.”
Why I wonder was Timothy circumcised? Especially after Paul (fairly vehemently) argued against the need for such a thing (in Galatians for example). Perhaps the answer lies in Corinthians:
“20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.”
In any case, I would bet Pope Francis had some of this in mind when he called all of us to respect other religions.
“3 Paul wanted to take him along on the journey, so he circumcised him because of the Jews who lived in that area, for they all knew that his father was a Greek. 4 As they traveled from town to town, they delivered the decisions reached by the apostles and elders in Jerusalem for the people to obey. 5 So the churches were strengthened in the faith and grew daily in numbers.”
Why I wonder was Timothy circumcised? Especially after Paul (fairly vehemently) argued against the need for such a thing (in Galatians for example). Perhaps the answer lies in Corinthians:
“20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.”
In any case, I would bet Pope Francis had some of this in mind when he called all of us to respect other religions.
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
I agree with that, well I’m not sure what Pope Francis was thinking, but being respectful is a good trait to have regardless.
Last edited:
P
Pattylt
Guest
I respect all religions to some degree or another…I have a real problem respecting the Westboro Baptist Church and Scientology. As far as those in those faiths, I tend to respect them as much as they respect my beliefs…so, it varies.
I don’t have great knowledge of some religions but of those I’ve studied, I can usually find much to respect in them…but not all of it!
I don’t have great knowledge of some religions but of those I’ve studied, I can usually find much to respect in them…but not all of it!
Last edited:
T
Tommy999
Guest
Perhaps you meant Westboro instead of Westbrook? I think the crazies that picket funerals are from Westboro Baptist somewhere in Kansas.
There appears to be a Westbrook Baptist congregation in New Mexico, but I don’t think they are controversial.
There appears to be a Westbrook Baptist congregation in New Mexico, but I don’t think they are controversial.
P
Pattylt
Guest
Thanks…I think auto correct dinged me again! I’ll fix it!
M
MiserereMeiDei
Guest
Papist makes sense. I’ve no problem with it. And no, there is no must. It is my choice. They are followers of Mohammed and thus Mohammedans practicing Mohammedism.
T
TULIPed
Guest
We have indeed become a society eager to be “offended”. Almost anything and everything is “offensive” to somebody these days. And yet…
We have many choices. We are free to choose words that lift up or break down. As Christians though, our choices are to conform with our King’s desires, no?
“Love is patient, love is kind…love doesn’t insist on its own way…”
If we choose to use words that are painful to others, how is this loving? If a non-believer’s only introduction to Christ is a disrespectful title (to her) of her beliefs, what is she to think of our King? I would argue this is especially true given that we’re to “love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us.”
B
BlueMaxx
Guest
After having lived in the Far East for several years eons ago, I respect Buddhist. I also spent some time with them in Alaska.
It is a gentle and loving philosophy…albeit lacking Christ.
It is a gentle and loving philosophy…albeit lacking Christ.
Last edited:
M
MiserereMeiDei
Guest
- I have no evidence this hurts or offends anyone. I have one statement from some guy on the internet. It holds no interest for me. I’m also not interested in articles written by people being offended in the last half decade or so. Offense is a cottage industry.
- Labels are necessary for communicating ideas. Mohammedan communicates these people are followers of teachings of a man named Mohammed, much as Christians are followers of Christ.
- This is more akin to being offended that one says Spain instead of España.
M
MiserereMeiDei
Guest
Are you trying to argue they aren’t Mohammedans?
T
TULIPed
Guest
Why not err and assume it is? In any case, from the Merriam Webster dictionary:
“Mohammedanism or less commonly Muhammadanism \ mō-ˈha-mə-də-ˌni-zəm , -ˈhä- also mü- \ noun, dated, often offensive”
Christians believe that Christ is God. Muslims believe that Mohammed was a prophet. When you refer to Muslim as a “Mohammedan” you are suggesting they view a prophet as God. This is (one reason) why the term is offensive to Muslims.
I would say a bit more like calling someone from Japan a - something I won’t repeat…
B
BlueMaxx
Guest
It is a valid term…even by Websters definition…
Mohammedan
adjective
Mo·ham·med·an | \ mō-ˈha-mə-dən , -ˈhä- also mü-\
variants: or less commonly Muhammadan
Definition of Mohammedan
of or relating to Muhammad or Islam
Other Words from Mohammedan
Mohammedan or less commonly Muhammadan noun
Mohammedanism or less commonly Muhammadanism \ mō-ˈha-mə-də-ˌni-zəm , -ˈhä- also mü- \ noun, dated, often offensive
First Known Use of Mohammedan
1681, in the meaning defined above.
Also further reading from a Catholic perspective…
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10424a.htm
Mohammedan
adjective
Mo·ham·med·an | \ mō-ˈha-mə-dən , -ˈhä- also mü-\
variants: or less commonly Muhammadan
Definition of Mohammedan
of or relating to Muhammad or Islam
Other Words from Mohammedan
Mohammedan or less commonly Muhammadan noun
Mohammedanism or less commonly Muhammadanism \ mō-ˈha-mə-də-ˌni-zəm , -ˈhä- also mü- \ noun, dated, often offensive
First Known Use of Mohammedan
1681, in the meaning defined above.
Also further reading from a Catholic perspective…
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10424a.htm
Last edited:
- Status