How Can We Claim Our Faith as Exclusive?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Everyman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
All the work you mention the Catholics did is kinda irrelevant if not actually destructive. An alphabet? What’s so intrinsically good about that? So they can read the Bible? Well, some may think that merely ripped those people from any sense of rootedness in their own tradition.

And no, I have not touched any of the references you asked about.
An alphabet, or writing of some kind, is necessary for traditions to be passed on faithfully. It is writing that allows a culture to transcend time and not be lost in the dust.

Bringing new and beneficial knowledge to people is good. Helping people be able to learn to read and write their own language is good.

I have absolutely no idea where you’re coming from that you could see such a thing as destructive.
 
And when I see that Christianity (Catholicism especially) is responsible for so many of the things I abhor in life (like industrialism, imperialism, colonization, “bigness,” etc.), it makes me wonder.
Aha! A man after my own heart. I abhor all those things too. I suppose in a sense Christianity is responsible for them inasmuch as they came out of Christian or post-Christian culture. If we want to claim credit for the good stuff, we have to accept responsibility for the bad. But it seems to me that Christianity is only indirectly responsible for most of the evils as well as many of the goods of modern society (I honestly think that the responsibility is more obvious with regard to the goods–for instance, Christianity can be blamed for both the defense of slavery and the abolitionist movement, but it was IMHO far more decisive in the latter than in the former).

I struggle with Catholicism because in so many ways it seems very “imperial” and it is certainly big. One of the main things that keep me Protestant is my preference for the local. But at the same time Christ prayed that we should be one, and for all that Catholicism has been deeply corrupted by the Roman imperial model, I think it’s also the only true source of resistance to that model.

It means a lot to me that both G. K. Chesterton and J. R. R. Tolkien, two of my heroes in terms of resistance to all those things you mentioned, were Catholics. If the Catholic imagination can give birth to the Shire, then that counts for a lot in my book.

In Christ,

Edwin
 
The Apostle Paul wrote that the natural mind cannot understand spiritual things 1 Cor 2:14.
But when we are born again, we are a new creation and able to understand “spiritual things”.
I have found over the years that many of my friends who are having a difficult time and don’t seem to understand “spiritual things” have not been born again.
Jesus told Nicodemus that he must be born again.
So, if you haven’t been born again possibly you might want to take that first step.

God Bless,
Robert
 
An alphabet, or writing of some kind, is necessary for traditions to be passed on faithfully. It is writing that allows a culture to transcend time and not be lost in the dust.

Bringing new and beneficial knowledge to people is good. Helping people be able to learn to read and write their own language is good.

I have absolutely no idea where you’re coming from that you could see such a thing as destructive.
Vietnam was hardly “alone among the Asian nations” in having a written system to communicate their language only because of Jesuits

The Chinese had a complete writing system as early as the Shang dynasty 3200 years ago, which was adopted by the Japanese by the 4th century CE. The Chinese writing system was used by Vietnam until its independence from China, Vietnam developed its own writing system that was used for 1000 years

“After Vietnamese independence from China in 939 CE, scholars began their creation of Chữ nôm, a logographic script that represents Vietnamese speech. For nearly the next 1,000 years – from the 10th century and into the 20th – much of Vietnamese literature, philosophy, history, law, medicine, religion, and government policy was written in Nom script. During the 14 years of the Tây Sơn (西山) emperors (1788–1802), all administrative documents were written in Chữ nôm. In the 18th century, many notable Vietnamese writers and poets composed their works in Chữ nôm, among them Nguyễn Du (阮攸) and Hồ Xuân Hương (胡春香). With the 17th century advent of Quốc ngữ(國語) – the modern roman-style script – Chữ nôm literacy gradually died out. In 1920, the colonial government decreed against its use. Today, fewer than 100 scholars world-wide can read Chữ nôm effectively. Much of Vietnam’s written history is inaccessible to the 80 million speakers of the language. A few Buddhist monks and the Jing (京), the Vietnamese living in China, can read Chữ nôm to some extent. (Original text provided by the Nom Preservation Foundation, with permission granted to publish this text under the GNU Free Documentation License.)”
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chu_Nom

The modern roman-style script has actually separated the people from their history. Children of Native Americans were sent forcibly to English language-only boarding schools and cut off from their families and their culture, including their religion and language, to “civilize” them.

Was this the intent of the Jesuits actively evil? No, but when one is convinced that one’s own way is not only the best, but really the only, way, one can do immeasurable damage to something that is already thriving and valuable, but different.

Everyman, I think you might find the book by John Michael Greer, “A World Full of Gods: an inquiry into polytheism,” interesting. It looks at the classic logical proof for monotheism and applies them to polytheism. Interesting food for thought.
 
The Apostle Paul wrote that the natural mind cannot understand spiritual things 1 Cor 2:14.
But when we are born again, we are a new creation and able to understand “spiritual things”.
I have found over the years that many of my friends who are having a difficult time and don’t seem to understand “spiritual things” have not been born again.
Jesus told Nicodemus that he must be born again.
So, if you haven’t been born again possibly you might want to take that first step.
Paul goes on, still talking to the Corinthians, “I could not speak to you as spiritual people, but rather as people of the flesh, as infants in Christ…Even now you are still not ready, for you are still of the flesh. For as long as there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not of the flesh, and behaving according to human inclinations?”

Perhaps while we are not walking according to the Spirit, we often have a hard time understanding. I think, though, that someone can be born again, but still cling to old things that obscure their thoughts.
 
Paul goes on, still talking to the Corinthians, “I could not speak to you as spiritual people, but rather as people of the flesh, as infants in Christ…Even now you are still not ready, for you are still of the flesh. For as long as there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not of the flesh, and behaving according to human inclinations?”

Perhaps while we are not walking according to the Spirit, we often have a hard time understanding. I think, though, that someone can be born again, but still cling to old things that obscure their thoughts.
When Jesus was asked by his disciples why He spoke in parables, He replied; “The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you. Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. This is why I speak to them in parables; Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear.”
The Bible agrees with your comment. But my original point was that while someone might have the ability to read the Bible, he might not have the ability to understand. God gives “the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom” to whom He pleases. When we are born again we are a new creation and all things become new. I don’t think God reveals these “secrets” to those who haven’t been born again. I wasn’t able to comprehend the scriptures, until I did what Jesus told Nicodemus he must do. John 3:1-21

God Bless,
Robert
 
I don’t think God reveals these “secrets” to those who haven’t been born again. I wasn’t able to comprehend the scriptures, until I did what Jesus told Nicodemus he must do. John 3:1-21

God Bless,
Robert
I’d be more inclined to say that one won’t fully understand the scriptures without the Holy Spirit. That may well be mostly what you mean, though. Remember the line about no one can come to me (Jesus) unless it has been granted by the Father? I sort of think of that when I hear the quote you gave about talking in parables.

Both hinge on the Holy Spirit and grace. It is good advice for someone who is confused to make sure the basics are in place.
 
In all my life, I never thought I would be one to utter the question of how I can claim my faith to be the only true one. I mean, I’ve always been dogmatic and viewed others’ beliefs as wrong-headed. But now I don’t know.

I was raised in a fundamantalist, evangelical atmosphere, came to be a Calvinist as a young adult, and recently joined the Catholic Church after a three-year study of it. Interestingly, after I moved from one position to another, I suddenly saw those who believed like I use to as inferior.

Maybe I’m just a jerk.

But I think there’s more at stake than just that. I’m beginning to think this: before globalization, we were all relatively tucked away in our cultural corners safely with our own traditions. We knew there were those that believed differently than us, we came into contact with them on occasion, but they were wrong in what they believed. And we were right. I mean, it’s how we were all raised.

But now, we are a global society, without the luxury of being cut off from these other cultures. And it’s becoming harder and harder to resist the temptation of not seeing similarities between, say, the teachings of Buddha and the teachings of Christ. And it’s becoming harder to reconcile the teachings of Paul with the teachings of Christ.

Point is, claiming dogmatically that mine is the exclusive, true faith is looking pretty narrow and meaningless in this small world of ours. What do we do?
Good points. Fences vs. communication. Just another thing we have to struggle with.
 
Good points. Fences vs. communication. Just another thing we have to struggle with.
All religions can’t be correct, can they? In this politically correct liberal world that we are subjected to, we are pressured to acquiesce to the mind set that we need to be more open minded.
It just doesn’t work! Convert 1 inch to the metric equivalent. What if you were given that question on an exam and you responded with 2.53 cm. And when you got the test back and told the teacher that he was being very narrow minded and opinionated. He might say that there is only one correct answer to that question, and 2.53 cm. wasn’t it. He would be justified in his response, and we are too in affirming that there is only one way to heaven. After all God tells us that all the others are “thieves and robbers.”

God Bless,
robert
 
There is a reason that philosophy needs to be studied along with religion. Philosophy asks the questions religion answers.

Everyman asks:
Look, I know all this jargon. But it ignores my question: How can I know that this stuff is true? What about all the other great wisdom traditions of the world? Only partial truths, if that? How can we know!?!

This is Aristotle’s first philosophy. What is truth, and how do we know when we have it?

Everyman then asks:
Okay. I think what you’re saying is basically good. But I wonder if when you say things are either true or not you are referencing–like previous folks–concepts of absolute truth, whereby I’m right and you’re wrong.

If so, how do we know I’m right and you’re wrong.

But then Everyman turns around and definitly knows:

Are you kidding? Imperialism and colonization destroyed civilizations that those committing the sins had no business messing with. Oh sure, it was all done in the name of God, to justify it on religious grounds, but it was outrightly wrong none the less.

Perhaps a good exercise would be to identify how you were so certain about the latter, and then use that standard to answer the orginal question.
 
You are being unfair in mixing theological truths (which everyman was concerned with) and historical truths/facts/beliefs, which is not the issue here.
 
Are you kidding? Imperialism and colonization destroyed civilizations that those committing the sins had no business messing with. Oh sure, it was all done in the name of God, to justify it on religious grounds, but it was outrightly wrong none the less.

Everyman takes a historical truth, and then claims that “it was outrightly wrong.”

On what grounds is he making the claim that the colonialists actions were “outrightly wrong”? Wouldn’t that imply that a universal standard of right and wrong exist?

That statement was not presented as an opinion. It was stated as a universal moral fact.

Where do we find these universal moral facts?
 
You are being unfair in mixing theological truths (which everyman was concerned with) and historical truths/facts/beliefs, which is not the issue here.
Our religion is based on the historical fact that Jesus did in fact live, made some outrageous claims and was then murdered on a cross.

Among these outrageous claims was the claim to be "the way, the truth and the life."

And on the third day after his death, he rose from the dead. Again, this is a hisorical fact, which, among other things, validated his claim of being “the way, the truth and the life.”
 
Christianity is not the only religion that claims exclusivity. All religions make this claim. You can go to the graves of all the other religions and dig up the bones of their founders. The main difference with Christiainity is we have a living Savior and by this fact alone it is the true religion. No other religion claim a living founder. God is the author of Christianity and He is the God of the Bible. Paul in 1 Cor. 15 tells us that if the resurrection of Christ did not happen then Christianity is not true. But it did happen and more than 500 people were eye witnesses to the fact that Christ died and rose again.👍

DLC
 
All religions can’t be correct, can they? In this politically correct liberal world that we are subjected to, we are pressured to acquiesce to the mind set that we need to be more open minded.
It just doesn’t work! Convert 1 inch to the metric equivalent. What if you were given that question on an exam and you responded with 2.53 cm. And when you got the test back and told the teacher that he was being very narrow minded and opinionated. He might say that there is only one correct answer to that question, and 2.53 cm. wasn’t it. He would be justified in his response, and we are too in affirming that there is only one way to heaven.
Well, actually most folks I know on both sides of the issue don’t claim that all religions are correct. If I didn’t believe that mine was a more accurate reflection of the spiritual reality that I experience, why would I place myself outside the mainstream of my family and my community to follow it?

There’s a great deal of difference between issues that can be answered by science/mathematics and those that must be answered by faith. For instance, how do you respond to the person that says that he can do a scientific analysis of the Host and wine both before and after sanctification and find no physical difference? Does this physical evidence disprove your belief that the bread and wine are transformed?
 
You can go to the graves of all the other religions and dig up the bones of their founders. The main difference with Christiainity is we have a living Savior and by this fact alone it is the true religion. No other religion claim a living founder. God is the author of Christianity and He is the God of the Bible.
To compare apples to apples, I think it would more correct to compare Jesus to the Gods of other religions. There are no religions of which I know where one can go and “dig up the bones” of their God(s). For Christianity, Paul or Peter are more accurately the “founders” in the terms you are using to describe the leaders of other religions, the ones who set up the structure and guidelines for worship, etc for the religion.

Most other religions would also not have a “living Savior” because they don’t have a theology that teaches that people need “saving” in the way that Christianity does. The doctrine of original sin is pretty specific to Christianity, AFAIK, though I don’t know if Islam includes it.
 
Look, I know all this jargon. But it ignores my question: How can I know that this stuff is true? What about all the other great wisdom traditions of the world? Only partial truths, if that? How can we know!?!
Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict) has an excellent book out called Truth And Tolerance: Christian Belief And World Religions It’s long, dense and difficult to read, but it is dead on point in answering your central question.

amazon.com/Truth-Tolerance-Christian-Belief-Religions/dp/158617035X

You should also read John Paul II’s Dominus Iesus. Also long, dense and difficult to read, but also dead on point.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20000806_dominus-iesus_en.html

Lots of luck!
 
From the Catechism:
843 The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as “a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top