Mainly For Those Not Roman Catholic: Whom Must You Obey?

Status
Not open for further replies.
meltzerboy said:
Unitarian Universalism seems to me to be an amalgam of moral principles that derive from the wisdom of the ages, which are interpreted by the individual reason and conscience of each person. Does that basically sum it up?

Thank you for this information.
Click to expand...
I would say that, in a nutshell, sums it up.

Peace,

Seeker
 
meltzerboy said:
PRMerger, Jews **dislike **that word “infallible” applied to people, even when divinely inspired. The Sacred Scriptures may be infallible, but not the person who wrote them, paradoxical as that may sound.
Click to expand...
You know, it occurred to me that a parallel discussion could be had with an atheist who proclaims, “Yes, I believe that there is a higher being; yes I believe that he revealed something about himself to us…but I dislike the word “Believer”. I just can’t say it while I’m an atheist, paradoxical as that may sound.”

Ok. But if you believe the above, then, even if you *“dislike” *saying you’re a Believer, ain’t you a Believer?
 
PRmerger said:
You know, it occurred to me that a parallel discussion could be had with an atheist who proclaims, “Yes, I believe that there is a higher being; yes I believe that he revealed something about himself to us…but I dislike the word “Believer”. I just can’t say it while I’m an atheist, paradoxical as that may sound.”

Ok. But if you believe the above, then, even if you *“dislike” *saying you’re a Believer, ain’t you a Believer?
Click to expand...
It all really rather depends what you mean by , , , , and avoiding the use of words that may be inaccurate/inadequate as descriptors.
 
PRmerger said:
Well, er…yeah. We* all* ought to strive to be accurate and adequate in our articulations, no? 🤷
Click to expand...
One should strive for that, of course, but any attempt to establish meaning leads to an infinite regress.

As anybody who learns other languages realizes, there are somethings that are not readily translatable, even with the best of dictionaries and that certain concepts tend to be culture-specific.

It’s rather like that between religions, I’d suggest. You want us to answer questions using terms/ideas that are Christian and, sometimes, specifically Catholic and that’s not something that works as easily as you might wish to believe - many Christian concepts are irrelevant/meaningless to Judaism because the religions don’t ‘work’ in the same way.
 
Kaninchen said:
You want us to answer questions using terms/ideas that are Christian and, sometimes, specifically Catholic and that’s not something that works as easily as you might wish to believe - many Christian concepts are irrelevant/meaningless to Judaism because the religions don’t ‘work’ in the same way.
Click to expand...
Actually, our religions do “work” in very, very similar ways. Quite.

Have you ever been to a Catholic liturgy, Kaninchen?
 
PRmerger said:
Have you ever been to a Catholic liturgy?
Click to expand...
That’s not the point.

It’s what the two religions are about that’s the point - Christianity isn’t Judaism plus Jesus and Judaism isn’t Christianity minus Jesus. We don’t have the same sets of ideas in all sorts of crucial ways.

Whether the Catholic mass has echoes of Temple rituals or not is an entirely different issue from the far more significant questions: “What is Christianity about?” and “What is Judaism about?”
 
PRmerger said:
Christianity is about Truth.

I was under the impression that this was what Judaism was “about” also. No?
Click to expand...
Too nebulous, what’s the focus of Christianity? What’s the point of being a Christian?
 
Kaninchen said:
What on earth does that mean?
Click to expand...
A covenant of a perpetual priesthood. Judaism does not profess this? No?

I think I’ve pretty much shown how our religions “work” in essentially the same way. :curtsey:

Soooo, to return back to my discussion with meltzerboy, when he squirms at saying the sacred writers were “infallible”, it remains true that he does believe that they were, indeed, infallible.

Just sayin’…
 
PRmerger said:
A covenant of a perpetual priesthood. Judaism does not profess this? No?
Click to expand...
What on earth does that mean?
I think I’ve pretty much shown how our religions “work” in essentially the same way. :curtsey:
Click to expand...
I congratulate you on your ability to satisfy yourself on the subject.
Soooo, to return back to my discussion with meltzerboy, when he squirms at saying the sacred writers were “infallible”, it remains true that he does believe that they were, indeed, infallible.
Click to expand...
Just sayin’…
Click to expand...
See above.
 
It is hard for alot of people to understand how a person or prophet can be infallible…

They are fallible…but it is God Who is the author…Who uses fallible, human beings to speak or guide His people, and that is why these prophets or leaders are persecuted or misunderstood, and not welcomed by their own.
 
LumenGent said:
Great question. The evidant reality is that there is no common central authority outside that of the Catholic Church. This is the unique quality of the CC.
Click to expand...
Not really. I think all the non Catholics said Christ is the central authority of whom they follow infallibly.
 
KathleenGee said:
It is hard for alot of people to understand how a person or prophet can be infallible…
Click to expand...
Especially when the prophet doesn’t say:“cats, ie small mammals that wrap themselves around your legs when you’re filling their bowls . . . . etc, etc, etc will turn up at breakfast time on Friday 24 June 2011 wanting to be fed” but, rather, “lo, in those times, there will appear in the homes of the people vessels of diverse forms and the beasts of the land will be much agitated”. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top