Is it possible to respect other's religious beliefs

[Valke2]

Finding the truth is indeed worth it. When you find the ultimate truth you have found God.

But if you believe that you found the ultimate truth through christainity and I believe I found ultimate truth through judaism, doesn’t this mean that there is a refusal on both our parts to acknowledge what the other has found?

 

[Valke2]

No, I meant what I posted. There are definite things we all know to be true. There exists absolute truth. Do you believe it?

Example?

 

[Gilbert_Keith]

Valke2

But if you believe that you found the ultimate truth through christainity and I believe I found ultimate truth through judaism, doesn’t this mean that there is a refusal on both our parts to acknowledge what the other has found?

Yes. So?

Regardless of what we think, one of us may have found the ultimate truth and the other didn’t.

What is your point?

 

[Valke2]

Valke2

But if you believe that you found the ultimate truth through christainity and I believe I found ultimate truth through judaism, doesn’t this mean that there is a refusal on both our parts to acknowledge what the other has found?

Yes. So?

Regardless of what we think, one of us may have found the ultimate truth and the other didn’t.

What is your point?

my point is that that situation is a recipe for disaster as history has shown. And in a nuclear age it may be a recipe for extinction.

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

I try respect everyones beliefs, no matter how strongly I disagree with them, as long as they don’t walk all over mine and call me a Mary/idol worshipper in the process.

 

[Gilbert_Keith]

Valke2

my point is that that situation is a recipe for disaster as history has shown. And in a nuclear age it may be a recipe for extinction.

It may or it may not. Are we supposed to throw over the possession of an absolute truth to keep peace with each other?

That seems to me a recipe for intellectual amd moral cowardice … for example, the capitulation to my neighbor who may approach me and say it’s o.k. for him to have sex with my grandchild because I **may be wrong **and he may be right in his NAMBLA view that “If not by 8, it’s too late.”

On a larger scale, are we supposed to avoid going toe-to-toe with Islamist terrorists because they are absolutely certain of their religion and therefore we should not be absolutely sure of ours?

The solution to the problem of extinction that you raise is not to lose faith in our absolute convictions, but to live out those convictions with a strong sense of charity and justice. Failure to live them out will surely lead to slavery or extinction, to be sure.

You are Jewish and you should know this if you know the 20th century.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

We all want to think of ourselves as being capable of respecting beliefs that are not our own. But is it possible? If someone takes the position that their religion is true and that other religions are either false or incomplete, how can they truly respect the religious beliefs of others?

As a Jew, I can claim that it is possible in Judaism, because we believe that anyone who lives a righteous life will have a share in the world to come. But the reality is that the majority of Jews, and maybe the vast majority of Jews, believe that Judaism is the one true religion and that all other religions are flawed.

If by respect we mean refraining from criticizing or insulting one’s religious beliefs, then I suppose it is possible. But if we mean that we are willing to accept the possibility that our neighbor’s beliefs are at a minimum, at least as valid as our own, then I’m not sure this is possible.

A person can respect the beliefs of others without agreeing with them. If we didn’t respect their faith, we would not allow them to express their faith.

In fact, if we didn’t respect their faith, we would forcefully attempt to make them leave their faith, perhaps kill them for believing something not of our own faith, and outlaw them from practicing their faith within our nation-- much like how many radically Muslim nations around the world refuse to allow other faiths to be practiced within their borders.

 

[kellie]

If someone takes the position that their religion is true and that other religions are either false or incomplete, how can they truly respect the religious beliefs of others?

They can’t. You can’t respect anything that is false. What you can respect is the other person’s **right **to his or her views, even when they are false.

You are correct Gilbert, we can’t respect something we don’t believe in.

Probably a good example is a rebel teen involved in criminal activity and who doesn’t believe in the laws of where he lives. He clearly shows lack of recpect for the laws, as he doesn’t agree with them.

But we can respect the right of everyone to have a belief, and respect their right to talk about it.

I don’t mean to appear Muslim-bashing here, but if the Muslim extremists had respect for people who did not believe in Islam, then we wouldn’t have had 9/11.

 

[cheddarsox]

There are religious beliefs that I do not respect, and people that I do not respect. I think they are idiots. But I respect their right to believe nonsense, and be idiots. I don’t have the right to force them to think or behave as I would have them do so…as long as they stay within reasonable limits. If their belief, practice of their belief or idiotic behavior is having real negative affects on society, society has the right to limit them to the extent of the negative affects.

The problem arises when people become so fervent that they perceive the mere presence of such beliefs and such people to be intolerable, and cook up false charges as to how their presence is having a negative affect.

When people start putting too much emphasis on the “invisible world” at the expense of the visible, physical world, things get crazy, and people start dying.

So, I may think that The chocolate covered pickle religion is kooky, but I see that they aren’t any real time threat to the rights of myself of those around me. But if I start imagining that they are secretly led by demons and that their demons are fighting my angels in a hidden war and I must get rid of all chocolate covered pickle believers lest their demons overcome my angels…then I have crossed the line.

No deity worth honor needs humans to fight their battles for them. We have been placed on this physical world, and that is what we are supposed to be worrying about. There will be time enough, if there is an afterlife, to fight demons side by side with angels. Now, we are here to take care of one another, and to honor the gods that are worthy of honor.

cheddar

 

[buffalo]

But if you believe that you found the ultimate truth through christainity and I believe I found ultimate truth through judaism, doesn’t this mean that there is a refusal on both our parts to acknowledge what the other has found?

There is only one ultimate truth. And Catholics do acknowledge our Jewish forefathers. We have a lot in common.

We are pretty much on the same page OT wise correct?

 

[buffalo]

Example?

We are alive.

 

[Valke2]

Valke2

my point is that that situation is a recipe for disaster as history has shown. And in a nuclear age it may be a recipe for extinction.

It may or it may not. Are we supposed to throw over the possession of an absolute truth to keep peace with each other?

Yes.

[QUOTEOn a larger scale, are we supposed to avoid going toe-to-toe with Islamist terrorists because they are absolutely certain of their religion and therefore we should not be absolutely sure of ours?
[/QUOTE]
The fact that they are absoultely certain of their religious dogma is exactly the problem. The fact that you are absolutely certain of your religious dogma is also the problem.

The solution to the problem of extinction that you raise is not to lose faith in our absolute convictions, but to live out those convictions with a strong sense of charity and justice. Failure to live them out will surely lead to slavery or extinction, to be sure.

If you believe that everyone who does not adopt your dogma is going to hell then it is impossible to respect them. Would you respect such a person enough to allow him to marry your daughter? Or allow your spouse to convert to their faith?

Lack of faith had nothing to do with the holocaust. Hiterl may have been anti-religious, but that is because he made Nazism a religion.

 

[rcwhiteh]

You can’t respect anything that is false. What you can respect is the other person’s **right **to his or her views, even when they are false.

Gilbert hit the nail on the head. Most people talk about “respecting” the religious beliefs of others and don’t really understand what they are saying.

If I respected the beliefs (especially the unique beliefs) of the Mormon faith, I’d be a Mormon, not a Catholic. To be precise, I tolerate the beliefs of the Mormon faith because I respect the right of Mormons to believe as they do. The same goes for Muslims, Jehovah’s Witnesses and any other non-Catholic faith.

(I’d better respect their right to believe; I spent 23 years in uniform defending that right! )

Similarly, I do not automatically grant my respect to any individual simply because they think they’re entitled to it. If they want my respect, they have to earn it. I will behave toward another person with the courtesy and deference as befits their status or position; kind of like the old “you salute the uniform, not the wearer” rule.

Let’s be sure we understand the difference between respect and tolerance, and then behave accordingly. We should respect the beliefs of our faiths and tolerate the beliefs of other faiths; we should respect the right of all persons to worship according to the dictates of their faith, and be courteous to them and their clergy on the grounds that they should deemed worthy of the courtesy until they prove they are not. But when some radical Muslim cleric preaches death and destruction upon all non-Muslims, my toleration for his beliefs will be nil; if he chooses to act upon his beliefs by murdering me or mine, he will shortly discover himself in Eternity.

 

[Valke2]

I’m still not sure what people mean when they are discussing absolute truth. Our understanding of an infinite God can never be perfect. It may be possible to believe that there is absolute truth, but I’m not sure anyone can accurately state what that absolute truth is.

If human beings are going to survive, I think we are going to have to let of the notion that our religion (whichever religion that is) is not perfect, that it is an attempt to open a way between us and the ineffable mystery of God and that there are other ways that are equally valid to do so. At the moment, it seems much more important for Islam to accept this than Judaism or Christanity. But in the end, to believe anything else, I think, is to invalidate the relgion and idolize dogma.

 

[Valke2]

Gilbert hit the nail on the head. Most people talk about “respecting” the religious beliefs of others and don’t really understand what they are saying.

If Let’s be sure we understand the difference between respect and tolerance, and then behave accordingly. We should respect the beliefs of our faiths and tolerate the beliefs of other faiths; we should respect the right of all persons to worship according to the dictates of their faith, and be courteous to them and their clergy on the grounds that they should deemed worthy of the courtesy until they prove they are not. But when some radical Muslim cleric preaches death and destruction upon all non-Muslims, my toleration for his beliefs will be nil; if he chooses to act upon his beliefs by murdering me or mine, he will shortly discover himself in Eternity.

That radical Muslim is preaching death and destruction because he believes he is in possesion of absolute truth and he does not respect the beliefs of others outside of his faith. When everyone think’s only their religious dogma is right, you end up with the following picture. I bunch of people standing around in a circle pointing fingers at each other and yelling “false.” And if you aren’t lucky, you end up killing each other.

 

[eleonardo]

If by respect we mean refraining from criticizing or insulting one’s religious beliefs, then I suppose it is possible. But if we mean that we are willing to accept the possibility that our neighbor’s beliefs are at a minimum, at least as valid as our own, then I’m not sure this is possible.

Depends what you mean by valid. For myself the belief of another person, if he has another belief than myself, is not **as **valid ,since, well , it’s another belief.

 

[rcwhiteh]

I said:

We should respect the beliefs of our faiths and tolerate the beliefs of other faiths; we should respect the right of all persons to worship according to the dictates of their faith, and be courteous to them and their clergy on the grounds that they should deemed worthy of the courtesy until they prove they are not. But when some radical Muslim cleric preaches death and destruction upon all non-Muslims, my toleration for his beliefs will be nil; if he chooses to act upon his beliefs by murdering me or mine, he will shortly discover himself in Eternity.

Valke2 said:

Then you end up with the following picture. I bunch of people standing around in a circle pointing fingers at each other and yelling “false.”

And I reply: No, if everyone behaves according to the original premise, you have a bunch of people standing around talking about anything and saying, “In my faith, we believe X about this subject,” and everyone else says, “I see.” If we can’t agree to tolerate each other’s beliefs, perhaps we shouldn’t be discussing religion.

 

[buffalo]

I’m still not sure what people mean when they are discussing absolute truth. Our understanding of an infinite God can never be perfect. It may be possible to believe that there is absolute truth, but I’m not sure anyone can accurately state what that absolute truth is.

If human beings are going to survive, I think we are going to have to let of the notion that our religion (whichever religion that is) is not perfect, that it is an attempt to open a way between us and the ineffable mystery of God and that there are other ways that are equally valid to do so. At the moment, it seems much more important for Islam to accept this than Judaism or Christanity. But in the end, to believe anything else, I think, is to invalidate the relgion and idolize dogma.

Since we are human we can search for the truth through reason. Some people have a fuller knowledge of truth than others? So too with religion (binding to God). One will always have the fuller truth than another. Two cannot be different and be equally true.

 

[Valke2]

Since we are human we can search for the truth through reason. Some people have a fuller knowledge of truth than others? So too with religion (binding to God). One will always have the fuller truth than another. Two cannot be different and be equally true.

They can if they are conveying the truth through story. Maybe biblical truth and factual truth shouldn’t be viewed through the same lens. Someone once said that not everything that is true necessarily happened.

 

[buffalo]

They can if they are conveying the truth through story.

Yes. Our Gospel writers have different but true accounts of Jesus. They are additive and taken together a fuller truth is known about Him.