Christianity and other religions

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
BetteTheRed said:
I think it implies the idea of "all our relations" - our relationship with the physical world - rather nicely.
Click to expand...
You have just exposed your ignorance of the meaning of biblical terminology. You have no clue to the Hebrew and Greek words for "kingdom" and how
their meaning differs from the English word. Nor do you or your UCCan ilk know how the Scriptural status of the NT can be defended from the NT itself! Prove me wrong!





























the
y
 
BetteTheRed said:
Similar to domain, but there's still a duality, which I think artificial, between what is Godde and what is "not-Godde"?
Click to expand...
You are making a faith statement in declaring an artificial duality between Godde and not Godde.

Nothing wrong with faith statements of course.
 
BetteTheRed said:
249689210_7054073994618372_3590051601337535660_n.jpg


This showed up on FB the other day. I like it a lot. And it doesn't just apply to indigenous religions. Personally, and historically, I identify most with Christianity. But I don't 'get' dissing other religions as a way to get followers for yours. I imagine most of us, even the ministers, agree?
Click to expand...
Back to the OP. Yes I agree.

Christianity has historically sought converts. I remember being shocked (many years ago) to learn that Judaism does not strive for conversions.

And the Dalai Lama once told someone interested in Buddhism that she should go more deeply into her own tradition.

It's fascinating to learn of the similarities among various faiths. There are differences, too, which are worth noting. I once assumed that all religions wanted to bring others into their folds.
 
I like the word Theos in our present realm where folk will attempt to control what ever ,,, causing a lot of ooze ... that can be classed as avarice.

I confess in regard to infinite things I know practically nothing ... thus Sum Zero stacks up!

One must admit to head folks ... with an excess of esteem! Expect it to come down to time running out and thus illustrations of End of Days in art form ... abstractions? Thus Runi matter is not insubstantial ... the dash is on to accomplish some understanding while starting with nothing ...

Could nothing, love and God be metaphorical and circular causing tempests? Counters the balance of powers allowing a place for it all to go down ... the waters below as a deep swamp to draw some conclusions from ...

I say politics is corrupting Serendipity! To know what can be controlled and not and the ripper ... the difference! It is a huge (thick) fabric to work one's way through ... some refer to the fabric as a caul ... membrane of foolishness!

How did we get here from there ...? Ah! get that flash ...
 
For many people religion reinforces a separation between us and them. Identity is protected by not encouraging others to share our religion.
 
Mystic said:
You have just exposed your ignorance of the meaning of biblical terminology. You have no clue to the Hebrew and Greek words for "kingdom" and how
their meaning differs from the English word. Nor do you or your UCCan ilk know how the Scriptural status of the NT can be defended from the NT itself! Prove me wrong!





























the
y
Click to expand...
I am sorry Mystic that you do not understand how much nonsense there is in saying that a document can prove its own validity. Somebody who believes a document might find comfort in the document testifying to its validity but the ultimate test of a document comes from outside the document. The Bible may be a reflection of God's Word but God's living Word, creation, is a critical test of the validity of any faith claim. And there is little outside of the Christian writings to verify the authenticity of every point that is claimed

I do not believe that any of the long monologues in the Gospel of John were spoken by Jesus though he likely said some things that are included in those monologues, more or less.

The Gospels served several purposes. To record the faith beliefs of the community or evangelist that wrote them, to encourage the community to persist in the face of challenges, and to invite others to join the community. The author of Matthew probably had a copy of Mark to read before writing the Gospel of Matthew. Luke probably had copies of Mark and Matthew. The author of the Gospel of John probably had copies of all the Synoptic Gospels

Reading the Gospels helps learn about the situation of each community.

There is much truth in each gospel but it is not literal truth.
 
Waterfall said:
Even within Christianity, a certain "smugness" ....as in I'm right, you're wrong kind of thing.
Click to expand...

It is a tremendous enigma meant to challenge the simple ... and thus the undesired complex!

Thus some are driven to figure how this come down as fallacy!
 
jimkenney12 said:
For many people religion reinforces a separation between us and them. Identity is protected by not encouraging others to share our religion.
Click to expand...
There's been a swing of the pendulum in my lifetime. When I was a child, being a Christian entailed the responsibility to spread the Word and bring others to Christ.
Evangelism has fallen out of favor and become a negative concept in many liberal/ progressive circles. We have come to value diversity in creation which is a good thing.
But have we forgotten how to share faith with others?
 
Bishop Spong, in his early years, said we have no right to try to share Christianity with those who already have their own sense of the Holy.

Spiritual seekers were different in his mind. Not sure if this changed as he got older and more strident.
 
Waterfall you said ------Even within Christianity, a certain "smugness" ....as in I'm right, you're wrong kind of thing

Here is the thing -----the Scripture themselves say they are right and true -----and while I agree that many --many people who call themselves Christians are not Christians that have received Jesus as their Lord and saviour ----- they are just using the word Christian to express their belief only in their self righteousness so they think they are all that and their ego is puffed up

----People who actually have received Jesus in their hearts Believe the Scriptures which Says they are Right and True -----so these Christians I would hope would say they Believe what the Scriptures say ----which is the Word is from God and it is Right and True -----which Gives God the Glory not ourselves -

I personally think----- unbelievers will always put the blame on anyone who says they are Christians to take the blame off themselves for their unbelief of what the Scriptures really say which is God's word is right and true ----- and they don't like what the scriptures say so their defence is to lash out at people who Call themselves Christians calling them smug and arrogant -----When really it is smug and arrogant of the unbeliever to unrecognise what Jesus did for them on the Cross and turn their backs and put their noses up in the air to snub what was done for them ------Just saying ----

I see Scriptures as you either believe them or you don't -----there is no right and wrong involved --it is all about our free choice to believe them or not -----we like to think right and wrong ---but Jesus said your either for me or against me -----your choice --no right or wrong here ----
 
Mystic said:
You have no clue to the Hebrew and Greek words for "kingdom" and how
their meaning differs from the English word.
Click to expand...

However, the Inclusive Bible, translated by Jesuits, so not sloppy work, uses kin-dom for kingdom in both Tanakh and New Testament.

I'm going to assume that their scholarship is a little more contemporary than yours, which appears to have stalled in about the 19th century.
 
And once again, there are several people ably displaying what non-Christian people dislike about Christianity - the "I'm always right, and you're always a heathen" position, which leads to very poor outcomes, like western cultures' historic mistreatment of indigenous cultures.
 
BetteTheRed said:
Actions speak louder than words. It was St. Someone who said something like "share the good news; if necessary, use words".
Click to expand...
For sure. I was going to mention social justice and other initiatives in my post but didn't want to lose the point about pendulum swing.

Hands on helping our neighbors is an important dimension of faith. But it's not the only dimension as we were discussing earlier on this thread.
 
BetteTheRed said:
However, the Inclusive Bible, translated by Jesuits, so not sloppy work, uses kin-dom for kingdom in both Tanakh and New Testament.

I'm going to assume that their scholarship is a little more contemporary than yours, which appears to have stalled in about the 19th century.
Click to expand...
Is the inclusive bible based on scholarship or is it an egalitarian translation? These two things are not necessarily identical.

Is the inclusive bible like the Message bible? An interpretation rather than a translation?

Asking because I would like to know and it seems like a fair question.
 
Redbaron ----and if LOL is going against the code of Conduct so should the symbol of the emoji of laughing to the point of crying you posted on 2 of my posts here ---one on page 12 Post 227 and one on page 14 Post 263 and on many others in other threads ----:ROFLMAO:so if anyone is going against the code of conduct it is the both of us -----so you better include yourself in the violation ----just because you are a monitor doesn't exempt you from the code of conduct and if it does it is a hypocritical system ----and your being a bully -----just saying ----:ROFLMAO:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top