Religious bigotry in seventh grade class room

@IRFRANK,

Quote:

You're right it's not germane.

Of course it was germane, Frank, to the point that was raised. Notice that Setanta himself discussed it.

Quote:

We don't need one more thread that wandered off into a **** throwing contest, as most do.

Calling discussing important pertinent issues is hardly **** throwing. These are just feeble excuses to help people avoid the issues.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Assuming that the "dead human" is Christ, you seem to be saying that
a group that prays to Christ cannot be considered Christian. I disagree.

As for the protection of known pedophiles, I must agree that that is a
disgrace and is as far from Christianity as it gets.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Quote:

Who will correct them?

Good point. I'm sure someone will be along to do that correcting. We are always very quick to point out someone else's bigotry and intolerance.

0 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

Calling discussing important pertinent issues is hardly **** throwing. These are just feeble excuses to help people avoid the issues.

I don't mind discussing the issues, that is why most of us come here. Too often it ends up being so personal and the name calling gets old, that's what I meant by **** storm. I am aware of Set's judgement of Buddhism and honestly don't care.

I do think we were wandering pretty far off the topic of how Lash should handle the child in her class. That's why it isn't pertinent.

0 Replies

@George,

George wrote:

Assuming that the "dead human" is Christ, you seem to be saying that
a group that prays to Christ cannot be considered Christian. I disagree.

As for the protection of known pedophiles, I must agree that that is a
disgrace and is as far from Christianity as it gets.

The dead human isn't Christ, but Mary, his mother.

I've never understood how Catholics square their predilection for praying to dead humans (or as they call them, 'saints') with Jesus' actual teachings.

The Catholic church has always seemed to embody the exact opposite... and we can see the hierarchy and sham of the whole thing being revealed today for what it is, as more and more abuses are uncovered - and more and more people in positions of power are found to have been covering up for these abuses, systematically, for decades.

Cycloptichorn

5 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Thanks for the clarification. Now I see what you meant.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

I must have heard it wrong, but I thought Christians prayed with the saints asking the intercession of saints, instead of worshiping the saints. Might you be confusing some prayers which are not considered to be worship with worship that take the form of prayer? Or are you questioning the sanity of the intercession part of the whole deal?

3 Replies

@Bennet,

Actually, Catholics (and all Orthodoxes as well as the Anglicans) pray to the saints - asking them for help by praying to God on their behalf or thanking them for having already done so.

The Evangelical Church (in Germany) [aka 'Protestants/Lutherans], does so as well - though they say, it isn't really necessary. What they do more is to remember model characters of 'saintly' person like Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Martin Luther King. ("Lutherans keep the saints, not as saviors or intercessors to God, but rather as examples and inspirations to our own faith and life." Augsburg Confession, XXI)

0 Replies

@Bennet,

Bennet wrote:

I must have heard it wrong, but I thought Christians prayed with the saints asking the intercession of saints, instead of worshiping the saints. Might you be confusing some prayers which are not considered to be worship with worship that take the form of prayer? Or are you questioning the sanity of the intercession part of the whole deal?

Let us keep in mind that the entire construct of religion is a farce to begin with, and none of my statements are intended to imply a support of any practice of appealing to any fictional being in a formalized, structural manner. I am only discussing this issue out of a curiosity as to how others square up what seem to be contradictions in their belief system, and obvious contradictions in their personal morals with those they state publicly.

I don't consider 'praying to someone' and 'praying to someone to ask them to intercede with someone else' to be a meaningful distinction. If this person were not in some way elevated above others, why would their intercession on your behalf be any more meaningful than your direct plea? The very nature of the Saint/intercession system actually reinforces the entire Catholic doctrine that man cannot converse with God directly, and requires them to interpret and intercede on one's behalf; a concept which, I believe, is antithetical to the actual things Jesus said on many occasions (provided he existed at all or actually said anything about any of this).

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Bennet,

Personally, I've never understood the practical difference....

Tell me a again why a prayer to Demeter is pagan worship, while a prayer to Isidore is monotheistic?

0 Replies

As Walter points out, even the Orthodox Church, the oldest continuous, organized Christian church, practices praying to saints. What are you suggesting, Cyclo, that this constitutes idolatry? Since the very beginning, there were significant portions of the faith community which did not consider the putative Jesus to have been divine. By the point of view of these people, praying to Jesus would not be praying to god, so would you consider that to be idolatry?

You remind me of those who impose their particular definition, such as those who deny that the Jehovah's Witnesses or the Mormons are Christians. Joe from Chicago has said that those who don't consider Jesus to be divine are not Christians. By what right do any of you impose your definitions?

3 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

As Walter points out, even the Orthodox Church, the oldest continuous, organized Christian church, practices praying to saints. What are you suggesting, Cyclo, that this constitutes idolatry? Since the very beginning, there were significant portions of the faith community which did not consider the putative Jesus to have been divine. By the point of view of these people, praying to Jesus would not be praying to god, so would you consider that to be idolatry?

You remind me of those who impose their particular definition, such as those who deny that the Jehovah's Witnesses or the Mormons are Christians. Joe from Chicago has said that those who don't consider Jesus to be divine are not Christians. By what right do any of you impose your definitions?

By the same right we all have to use our brains to make judgements about various matters. I doubt anyone gives a **** what my opinion is, so it's hardly material to anyone else's life, and I can't see how the word 'imposing' comes into play.

To answer your questions directly, yes - those who deny the divine nature of Jesus would indeed be correct to say that 'praying to him' would be idolatry. And there's at least some evidence to support their position from his own words, in that he specifically said not to pray to him. The 'orthodox church' is, once again, the exact OPPOSITE of the message Jesus directly gave to people; it is a human attempt to wrest control of the message and directly gain power over various populaces. Their praying to saints for intercession is a reflection of the power structure, not a justification of anything at all.

That is, once again, assuming that the man existed or said anything about or like any of this at all, which is really a leap of faith right there, irregardless of one's personal opinion about the nature of how the worship of a likely-fictional supreme being should go.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@Setanta,

The church saying "I pray to this icon of a saint, but it's not idolatry" is about as convincing as some of the folks who come on this board and say "I hate black people, but I'm not racist."

Catholicism/Christianity basically painted over paganism and called itself a new religion....

Christmas is the Winter Solstice festival. Easter is the Rite of Spring. Jesus is just a reworking of Osiris, Tammuz, or similar. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life-death-rebirth_deity)

2 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

Joe from Chicago has said that those who don't consider Jesus to be divine are not Christians.

Well, to be fair, I only say that because it happens to be true.

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

No, it happens to be your opinion. Those who believe that Siddhartha was the Buddha don't consider that he was god, do you assert that we should not call them Buddhists? By what right to you make such an assertion? Are you god?

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

In that case, in your oh so humble opinion (i'm sure), who are are the Christians? Do not all Protestants share that heritage? Does that mean that there are no Christians?

It amazes me how complacently people will dance off into such a minefield.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

George wrote:

Assuming that the "dead human" is Christ, you seem to be saying that
a group that prays to Christ cannot be considered Christian. I disagree.

As for the protection of known pedophiles, I must agree that that is a
disgrace and is as far from Christianity as it gets.

The dead human isn't Christ, but Mary, his mother.

I've never understood how Catholics square their predilection for praying to dead humans (or as they call them, 'saints') with Jesus' actual teachings.

The Catholic church has always seemed to embody the exact opposite... and we can see the hierarchy and sham of the whole thing being revealed today for what it is, as more and more abuses are uncovered - and more and more people in positions of power are found to have been covering up for these abuses, systematically, for decades.

Cycloptichorn

Since you are going to criticize the Catholic church, you seem to have left out one of the most common criticisms, in that the emphasis on humility (blessed are the poor) doesn't really square with the priceless treasures in the Vatican. Just thought you would want to have a complete list of (constructive) criticisms?

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

No, it happens to be your opinion.

If you have a better definition, you're free to offer it.

Setanta wrote:

Those who believe that Siddhartha was the Buddha don't consider that he was god, do you assert that we should not call them Buddhists?

That all depends. Does Buddhism hold that the Buddha was the son of god and died to redeem the sins of mankind? If so, then people who don't believe that can't, with justification, call themselves "Buddhists." On the other hand, if Buddhism holds that the Buddha was just a very righteous and wise person, then people who think he was a god can't, with justification, call themselves "Buddhists."

Setanta wrote:

By what right to you make such an assertion? Are you god?

Only to some obscure cargo cults in the south Pacific region, to whom I am known as "Sky-Joe the Rain Bringer."

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote:

Catholicism/Christianity basically painted over paganism and called itself a new religion....

Considering that pagans before Christianity needed "to see" an image of their pagan god, was there any way for pagans to adopt a monotheistic faith with a spiritual (aka, can't visualize) god, unless there was a Jesus? In other words, did pagans need a Jesus to become monotheistic. They would never follow the example of the Hebrews, since the Hebrews were just a bunch of ex-nomads that were laughable to any pagan worth his clay idol.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

The very nature of the Saint/intercession system actually reinforces the entire Catholic doctrine that man cannot converse with God directly...

That's not Catholic doctrine. That's what's known, in theological circles, as "made-up stuff."

1 Reply

Religious bigotry in seventh grade class room

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know