A little polytheism.

[deaddude]

Yes. It's obvious you have trouble telling anything from anything else.

See you in the godhead, nazi.

This fool ONLY makes adhominems.

Next time I want your input I'll just cut one. The content is the same.

Kill self

Suck it.

Snarky ad hominem attacks add spice and humor to my already stupendous posts.

Cut down on the Spice RWA, it is drowning out the salient and persuasive points your making.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Cut down on the Spice RWA, it is drowning out the salient and persuasive points your making.

Suck it.

 

[deaddude]

Responding with yet another ad hominem, no worries already added it to the list.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Responding with yet another ad hominem, no worries already added it to the list.

Add this to your list: "Kill self"

 

[deaddude]

no prob, I'll squeeze it between "suck it" and your fart comment.

 

[Mariner]

I appreciate your point that in some schools of Christian thought, the entire transaction is between the individual and God. In many, however, there do seem to be rituals:

--attending church weekly
--the Catholic Mass, with all its complex rituals and symbols
--Christmas, Easter, Ash Wednesday, etc.--holidays on which many Christians engage in specific rituals
--Lent
--observing a day of rest once a week
--the building of churches with specific symbols of various types

I'm sure there are many more, but I'm not an expert in Christianity. Nothing wrong with rituals--they're a typical way that religions make themselves real to their believers. For those who like them, Hinduism has literally thousands of potential rituals associated with thousands of modes of worship. Personally, I perform almost none, and that is acceptable too, though I do have a dancing Shiva in my house.

Mariner.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I'm sure there are many more, but I'm not an expert in Christianity..

It's basically just like islam. All us monotheists should get along. We don't because we're stupid and unenlightened.

 

[Mariner]

sarcastic, but seriously--if everyone believes in one God then why make such a fuss about the various ways of praising Him?

Mariner

PS I'm going to keep suggesting that people take up the use of the word "Islamist" to mean reactionary, violent Muslim. That way we can criticize Islamists without needing to put down Islam. I read this useful distinction from conservative columnist David Brooks.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

sarcastic, but seriously--if everyone believes in one God then why make such a fuss about the various ways of praising Him?

Mariner

PS I'm going to keep suggesting that people take up the use of the word "Islamist" to mean reactionary, violent Muslim. That way we can criticize Islamists without needing to put down Islam. I read this useful distinction from conservative columnist David Brooks.

Ask the islamists.

Christians believe Jesus is divine, muslims don't. In no way are these beliefs compatible. Muslims believe mohammed is a great prophet, no one else does.

They do not worship the same god either. Mohammed took the moon god from the polytheistic religion around him and made it THE ONE. We do not worship the moon god. Muslims do.
The moon god preaches violence to spread islam. Christianity spreads itself through appealing to heart and minds. The crusades were a low point and have been condemned by modern churches.

 

[dmp]

In many, however, there do seem to be rituals:

--attending church weekly
--the Catholic Mass, with all its complex rituals and symbols
--Christmas, Easter, Ash Wednesday, etc.--holidays on which many Christians engage in specific rituals
--Lent
--observing a day of rest once a week
--the building of churches with specific symbols of various types

Except none of those things has anything to do with one's salvation/access to God/Heaven. Those are traditions. No Catholic Mass symbol or ritual has been required by Christ. Holiday Ritual? Christ neither professed nor taught his followers to participate in ritual - the closest thing I can think of is what the church calls 'holy communion' which is mostly a bastardization, imo. The Last Supper, Christ said for his disciples to eat and drink together in remembrance of Him. The idea was 'stick together, and have faith'.

Lent? No idea what that really is; or where the Bible commands one to participate. Building a church is NOT a ritual. Symbols aren't rituals.

By strict definition there are 'rituals' in Christian Churches - but again I stress, NO ritual is required....they sorta just happen. And they vary from church to church.

 

[dilloduck]

sarcastic, but seriously--if everyone believes in one God then why make such a fuss about the various ways of praising Him?

Mariner

PS I'm going to keep suggesting that people take up the use of the word "Islamist" to mean reactionary, violent Muslim. That way we can criticize Islamists without needing to put down Islam. I read this useful distinction from conservative columnist David Brooks.

The fuss is not about how people praise God. As RWA pointed out the fuss is about a group of intolerant mulims who wish to incite all muslims to continue attack the culture of anyone else as if it were Satan to achieve thier own personal agendas. They don't accept hindu teachings, they don't accept buddhas' teachings. they are intolerant of anyones faith or culture except thier own. For you to ignore this fact is inexcusable and prevents you from seeing the problem or developing a solution.

 

[Mariner]

would say the same thing--that their ritual itself isn't the religion, but assists believers in participating. Symbols, stories, ritual--they all assist in accessing religious experiences. Catholics, I think, place relatively heavier emphasis on ritual than, say, Unitarians. Similarly, Hinduism has a wide range of ways to engage it--from rituals performed before images of various aspects of God to purely mental participation via meditation or behavior and attitude.

Mariner.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

would say the same thing--that their ritual itself isn't the religion, but assists believers in participating. Symbols, stories, ritual--they all assist in accessing religious experiences. Catholics, I think, place relatively heavier emphasis on ritual than, say, Unitarians. Similarly, Hinduism has a wide range of ways to engage it--from rituals performed before images of various aspects of God to purely mental participation via meditation or behavior and attitude.

Mariner.

Absolutely wrong. Daily prayer 5 times toward mecca is NOT optional in islam.

 

[Mariner]

And professing acceptance of a dogmatic creed is not optional in Roman Catholicism. Accepting Jesus as your savior doesn't seem to be optional in evangelical Christianity. The Bible appears to be required reading in all forms of Christianity.

Early Christianity (according to the Gnostic Gospels) did experiment with a completely inward experience, more like the mystical Greek, Hindu, or Sufi ideas, but those who favored solidly built churches with definitive rituals won out as being more practicable. (See Elaine Pagels' book "The Gnostic Gospels.")

Mariner.

 

[Nienna]

And professing acceptance of a dogmatic creed is not optional in Roman Catholicism. Accepting Jesus as your savior doesn't seem to be optional in evangelical Christianity. The Bible appears to be required reading in all forms of Christianity.

Early Christianity (according to the Gnostic Gospels) did experiment with a completely inward experience, more like the mystical Greek, Hindu, or Sufi ideas, but those who favored solidly built churches with definitive rituals won out as being more practicable. (See Elaine Pagels' book "The Gnostic Gospels.")

Mariner.

Gnosticism was fought diligently by the early Christian church adherents.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

And professing acceptance of a dogmatic creed is not optional in Roman Catholicism. Accepting Jesus as your savior doesn't seem to be optional in evangelical Christianity. The Bible appears to be required reading in all forms of Christianity.

Early Christianity (according to the Gnostic Gospels) did experiment with a completely inward experience, more like the mystical Greek, Hindu, or Sufi ideas, but those who favored solidly built churches with definitive rituals won out as being more practicable. (See Elaine Pagels' book "The Gnostic Gospels.")

Mariner.

As it turns out, the most lasting effect of a religion is not the inward experience, but the effect on society of the moral code it espouses. Behavior is key. Everything else is intangible, like drunkenness.

 

[dilloduck]

As it turns out, the most lasting effect of a religion is not the inward experience, but the effect on society of the moral code it espouses. Behavior is key. Everything else is intangible, like drunkenness.

 

[Mariner]

Sorry, I didn't see your previous post.

I agree with it completely--there are a small number of fundamentalist Muslims (whom we could call Islamists) who want to influence all Muslims to become more conservative. So, the question is how do we get some traction in the opposite direction? Of course we have to remove the actively violent Islamists. But more importantly, we have to undo the viral idea they have spread, that it's them against us. In other words, the solution is political, not just military. I fear that we could win the military battle while losing the political war.

I don't respect the violent forms of Islam, but I have no problem with the Muslims I personally know, who are nonviolent, and condemn beheadings etc. in strong language, saying they are ashamed of the acts of the Islamists.

Mariner.