Is "Coexist" anti-Christian?

[batman1973]

Okay, I’ve got: Starwars, Star trek, don’t know, don’t know, don’t know, Firefly

The S is from Farscape. The circle above the lightsaber is a Stargate. The X, I’m not sure of.

 

[AbideWithMe]

I know you believe you know you are right. And you “know” with 100% absolute certainty you are right by what? Faith. I’m of course assuming that’s what you walk by. Rather than by sight. Beginning of course with faith in a Creator God unless you were actually present in Eden. Faith in the New Testament story of Christ. Unless you actually walked the earth in Apostolic times with Him. Faith in what your church teaches and in how it interprets. This doesn’t mean you don’t have the one Truth. But it does mean it’s taken you a lot of faith steps to believe you do. So without faith being able to be 100% absolutely proven without faith itself, might as well coexist with others who have a different faith than you do in the meantime, until we believe Christ returns. Peace.

I agree. No human, till Judgment Day, knows with complete certainty that what they believe is totally correct.

 

[JRKH]

The S is from Farscape. The circle above the lightsaber is a Stargate. The X, I’m not sure of.

I took the X as being an “X wing fighter”…

Peace
James

 

[TypesAndShadows]

The S is from Farscape. The circle above the lightsaber is a Stargate. The X, I’m not sure of.

The line under the Stargate is a sonic screwdriver (from Doctor Who), not a lightsaber. If the ‘X’ is an x-wing (which I initially assumed), we’d have Star Wars twice, which doesn’t seem right?

 

[agnes_therese]

The line under the Stargate is a sonic screwdriver (from Doctor Who), not a lightsaber. If the ‘X’ is an x-wing (which I initially assumed), we’d have Star Wars twice, which doesn’t seem right?

Thanks, I thought that was the sonic screwdriver, but wasn’t quite sure. (and I dare to call myself a Dr. Who fan!)

 

[agnes_therese]

I find those “Coexist” stickers always land on the cars with the “Prop-H8”, teachers union, rainbow, and Obama 08 stickers. Clearly, the intent is that we should all coexist by holding uniformly leftist political views. It is leftist shorthand - nothing more.

Most of the ones I see are on cars with no other bumper stickers. Therefore I refrain from judging the car owner’s political views.

 

[seeker57]

Interesting comments and points of view.

Speaking solely for myself, I believe coexist is neither relativist nor weak.

I don’t accept all of the teachings of Islam, but I cannot condemn someone who is Muslim for their beliefs.

I would say the same thing about Christianity and Christians.

In my faith, we believe aspects of the divine, or God, can be found in all religions, but that none has all the answers or possesses the ultimate truth.

I have read here, and know from experience, there are those who would disagree with me and say they believe in the one true faith.

I believe that would be the position of the woman who went on the rant to my neighbor.

But I have to wonder whether such vehemence is itself a sign of weakness, which is why I posited the question about whether the woman’s faith was too fragile to withstand scrutiny.

I don’t know the answer to that, but it still remains an interesting issue for me.

Peace,

Seeker

 

[JRKH]

Interesting comments and points of view.

Speaking solely for myself, I believe coexist is neither relativist nor weak.

I don’t accept all of the teachings of Islam, but I cannot condemn someone who is Muslim for their beliefs.

I would say the same thing about Christianity and Christians.

In truth - neither can we “condemn” others for their beliefs. Condemnation is not what we are to be about.

In my faith, we believe aspects of the divine, or God, can be found in all religions, but that none has all the answers or possesses the ultimate truth.

The Catholic Church pretty much agrees with this though we would refrain from saying “all” religions contain elements of the divine. Certainly the older, well established ones do.
Of course we disagree with the second part of your comment.

I have read here, and know from experience, there are those who would disagree with me and say they believe in the one true faith.
I believe that would be the position of the woman who went on the rant to my neighbor.

But I have to wonder whether such vehemence is itself a sign of weakness, which is why I posited the question about whether the woman’s faith was too fragile to withstand scrutiny.

I don’t know the answer to that, but it still remains an interesting issue for me.

Peace,

Seeker

An interesting observation. A sign of weakness? Yes - but it is not a weakness in the faith but more a weakness in her that is the result of an immaturity in the faith. The more mature one becomes in Faith the less likely one is to “rant” in this manner.

Of course that said - and for the purposes of this discussion - we really don’t know the actual “facts” of the situation. Did this woman truly “rant” or was that simply the impression your friend got and conveyed to you…So…we can really only treat this as a “hypothetical” situation and make no judgement on the actual persons involved.

Peace
James

 

[lboecker]

http://defendingcontending.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/coexist1.jpg?w=500&h=500

So true

 

[cheese_sdc]

Your co-worker is entitled to her view, and entitled to express it. She probably believes that there is no way to salvation except through confessing Jesus as your personal Saviour, and considers that those who adhere to other beliefs are doomed to eternal torment. Rather than ask her not to express these views, or establish a social convention in your workplace that makes this impossible, why not ask her about what is behind her belief? and then, if you wish, challenge it, or express your opposing view.

I don’t see that he was asking her to not express those beliefs, just that he was seeking understanding.

 

[cheese_sdc]

Clearly, the intent is that we should all coexist by holding uniformly leftist political views. It is leftist shorthand - nothing more.

When I see the “Coexist” sticker, I think that we can all come together with our differences and try to create a society for all. I see it as a hopeful statement that we can leave behind fundamentalist religious worldview that says “My ways should be your way”.

I’m a Unitarian Universalist. Your belief in the divinity of Jesus does me no harm, just as my nonbelief in the divinity of Jesus does you no harm.

 

[cheese_sdc]

The Catholic Church pretty much agrees with this though we would refrain from saying “all” religions contain elements of the divine. Certainly the older, well established ones do.

Likewise, other religions found everywhere try to counter the restlessness of the human heart, each in its own manner, by proposing “ways,” comprising teachings, rules of life, and sacred rites. The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men.

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html

 

[Loren_1of6]

The line under the Stargate is a sonic screwdriver (from Doctor Who), not a lightsaber. If the ‘X’ is an x-wing (which I initially assumed), we’d have Star Wars twice, which doesn’t seem right?

My experts assure me that the “X” is from Babylon 5.

That gives us:
C: Death Star from Star Wars
OE: Starship Enterprise from Star Trek (TOS)
X: Fighter from Babylon 5
I: Sonic Screwdriver from Dr. Who and Stargate from Stargate
S: Farscape symbol
T: ship from Firefly

Is that right?

 

[skeyes]

I believe “coexist” at best is naivete and at worst a direct onslaught against Catholics. Last week I watched an old presentation by Archbishop Fulton Sheen where he had a lot of bad to say about people who would like to “coexist” just before they take away all our freedoms. I don’t trust people who use these terms because I have the distinct feeling the “hammer” will fall next.

Stan

 

[CMatt25]

I’m a Unitarian Universalist. Your belief in the divinity of Jesus does me no harm, just as my nonbelief in the divinity of Jesus does you no harm.

Cheese, I’ve heard of a minority called UU Christians or something to that affect. Not sure if they’re still around. I know the last percentages I saw were 10% of UU’s ID UU & Christian within UU fellowship. So you would even coexist with them too, right?

 

[loozcannon]

However - There are those who, in their misguided attempts to evangelize, lose sight of the fundamental principle of Love. Instead, the push, the prod, they become intolerant, belligerent, they fail to listen and to see Christ in others. They THINK that they are working to bring people to Christ, but the result is the opposite.
Such people actually do damage to the kingdom.

Love your neighbor as yourself…
If you wish to be tolerated, then be tolerant.
If you wish to be listened to, then be willing to also listen
AND speak in ways that are respectful and filled with the Love of our Lord.

Well said!

I believe it was St. Franics of Assisi that said “Preach the Gospel at all times and when necessary use words.”

 

[Armyvet007]

Where can I get one calling for science to put down its silly notion it has any authority/“right” in determining the Truth and that it must treat the various pseudo-sciences and quackery as equally valid? That is, after all, basically what this bumper sticker is demanding of the various religous faiths.

 

[JRKH]

While the idea of these stickers being “anti-Christian” has been brought up, something that I haven’t seen mentioned here is the fact that, if these stickers are “anti-Christian”, they are just as much “Anti-Muslim”…
I can’t speak for the other faiths represented, but certainly Christianity and Islam both seek equally to reach out and convert others.
So the idea of the sticker being “anti” (if indeed it is) is certainly not limited to Christians.

Peace
James

 

[ebonykawai]

Where can I get one calling for science to put down its silly notion it has any authority/“right” in determining the Truth and that it must treat the various pseudo-sciences and quackery as equally valid? That is, after all, basically what this bumper sticker is demanding of the various religous faiths.

Are you calling ALL other faiths invalid and quackery?

 

[Armyvet007]

Are you calling ALL other faiths invalid and quackery?

Invalid- If X faith considers itself to be the True faith, then all other faiths would be considered by the X faith to be invalid [here to mean in error; not True]. I used the word valid to highlight the science and pseudo-science analogy. For a similar religous analogy I would have used something like “in error” or “Truth obscured by error”.

Quackery- the Jedi “religion” or Scientology or the New Age crud.

My main point was to question why one form of discovering/understanding the Truth [religion] is being held to a completely different, and frankly faulty, standard then another form of discovering/understanding the Truth [science]. Both forms are, at their base, founded on an assumed Truth and should therefore both be open to this type of nonsense [the politically motivated coexist sticker (which last I checked peace and male/female weren’t religous fatihs; I also object to the fact that two rather important faiths were ignored/not deemed important enough to be included- Hinduism and Buddhism.)]