A question on the hypocricies of religion

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
I just find it intriguing that madamc, who wrote that she is Roman Catholic, uses the Jewish way of writing "God," and several other beliefs (both on the Virgin Mary and including her belief on the origin of homosexuality coincidentally enough) is not Roman Catholic. This is not a slam against madamc at all, because religion is definitely very personal, and I respect everyone's religious beliefs.
Click to expand...

I was born into a Roman Catholic family, I was baptised as a Roman Catholic. Like, I have said before, I have studied other religions. My thoughts on the Virgin Mary are not Catholic, obviously, and neither are my thoughts about Christianity Christian. Just because I was born in a certain religion, shouldn't keep me from learning about other religions, keeping me ignorant.

People here seem to forget that Christianity isn't the only religion in the world, and the bible isn't the only "holy book". People also seem to forget that Christianity is like a pot pourri of many theologies, Judaism the most prominent. So all Christians, and Catholics a like, have Jewish roots. Hey, it's the same G-d! There's only one. And your Lord, Jesus, was a Jew, and Mary was a Jew, and Joseph, etc.

Melon, for the last time, my assumptions of the origins of homosexuality wasn't a religious one, it was a medical one.

Oh and BTW, I love that quote from Karl Marx, "Religion is the opium for the people." That is exactly why I am 100% for separation of church and state, because religion can definitely be used for evil. However, just because it can be used for evil doesn't mean that it is always evil.
Click to expand...

The purpose of that quote is that religion drugs the people. Remember, Catholics and Christians are/were not allowed to question authority, and weren't allowed to read. The church knew early on that knowledge is power. Knowledge is power is another Kabbalah teaching. If you keep people from gaining knowledge, they won't have any power. So, metaphorically, the Christian religion (the ones who believe in christ, like catholics, protestants, etc) gave reasons for people to beLIEve, like a pusher gives drugs to a person, ready to consume. Like a drug, Christianity gave people hope, false hope, because the poor stayed poor and were manipulated to stay that way.

I am more of a spiritualist. I just say what I have learned on my own. And yes, religion is personal.
 
And about science not having any explanation for the "healing" of your father - that does not mean it was a divine power. People used to pray for good weather before we explained the weather with science (and subsequently became able to predict it with a high degree of accuracy). When the weather was good, it was an answer to prayer. When the weather was bad, they just didn't pray hard enough. Now we know that it was all a waste of time because weather patterns don't react to prayer.

Sure there are things that science can't explain right now but science is gradually taking power away from your gods. Eventually, the definition of god will change to adapt to science. As Albert Einstein said, "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. The religion which is based on experience, which refuses dogmatic eplanations. If there's any religion that would cope with the scientific needs it will be Buddhism...."
 
Originally posted by Diemen:
Madam, you have a really strange definition of believe if you say I don't believe. So believers aren't allowed to have any doubts? That's pretty ridiculous. I have plenty of doubts, but that doesn't stop me from believing. Faith and belief are intimately connected to one another, and to suggest that in order to believe you have to rid yourself of all doubts is pretty far-fetched. I am sure my grandparents had plenty of doubt at whether my dad would ever walk, but that didn't stop them from believing. Belief in the way I'm familiar doesn't mean totally giving up all your inhibitions and human doubts - but it means that even with those doubts, you know that you are on the right path and are determined to stay on it.

I really don't like it when people label believers as mindless sheep. I never claimed to have no doubts. I don't know with absolutely certainty (hence, without any doubt) that it was the Virgin Mary who helped my dad. But I believe it was.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't have any doubts that there is a G-d, and that I am in one with G-d. I know, and knowledge is power. BeLIEvers do have doubts. Look at the word I put in caps... LIE... isn't that a clue. The english language is loaded with riddles. My definition of beLIEf, as I said before, is insecurity, loaded with doubt. I have gotten rid of the word "beLIEf" out of my vocabulary.

I never said that believers were mindless sheep. Even if I did, why don't you like it? I don't want to pick on you, but do you feel like you are following, and not on your own spiritual path?

Another thing, Jesus is said to be a shepard, and his followers are his sheep...Jesus, the shepard, guides his sheep. Is that a good thing?
confused.gif
 
Originally posted by DC:
I have one question about the virgin conception of Jesus - Why does the Gospel according to Mathew give the geneology of Jesus on Joseph's side if he was not sired by Joseph? This doesn't make any sense.
Click to expand...

Because the term "virgin" meant that she was "in one" with G-d. She was pure minded. In hinduism, we can say that all her chakras were aligned, and she was in perpetually enlightened.

It is said that Joseph was chosen to be the step father of Jesus.

There is a book that talks about Jesus, but I dont remember the title...it is highly controversial. Once I get hold of the title, I'll post it here.


Also, what kind of complications would occur during pregnancy and childbirth if the hymen was still intact? I assume it would have to be intact, otherwise no one would really know if she was a virgin or not.
Click to expand...

I think the hymen would have broken when she started to dialate.
 
Yes, Angela, that does explain my annoyance. We have images in the sanctuary, but in my 28 years of attending the Methodist church, I can not recall an instance of worshipping any of these items. I also do not consider the heavier use of images in the Orthodox or Catholic churches to be "idol worship." They are images, statues, etc. much like my stained glass window, used to relate the human features of Jesus, Mary, the Apostles, or whomever.

I do recall from visiting a Hare Krishna temple in New Orleans in 1993 that they informed us that they do pray directly to the idols in their temple, colorful little doll-like statues of Krishna, Vishnu, and other deities. But I'm not Hare Krishna and did not participate in praying to them.

No offense was taken at either your response nor that of Madamc. I just wanted to note for the record that I do not worship idols.

Also, DebbieSG is correct that putting any other object or person before God is idolising.

[This message has been edited by U2Bama (edited 03-07-2001).]
 
I also do not consider the use of icons in the Orthodox or Catholic churches to be "idol worship." They are images, statues, etc. much like my stained glass window, used to relate the human features of Jesus, Mary, the Apostles, or whomever.
Click to expand...

remember when moses found out that his people were worshipping the golden calf? a statue? whether it's human or animal, it's a statue, or a picture, and that is idolising. why isn't it idolising? because the catholic churches do it? that doesn't mean its right. it's still a sin. you are looking up to jesus, mary and joseph instead of G-d. To worship G-d, you don't need a picture or a statue.
 
Originally posted by madamc:
remember when moses found out that his people were worshipping the golden calf? a statue? whether it's human or animal, it's a statue, or a picture, and that is idolising. why isn't it idolising? because the catholic churches do it? that doesn't mean its right. it's still a sin. you are looking up to jesus, mary and joseph instead of G-d. To worship G-d, you don't need a picture or a statue.
Click to expand...

The people were "worshipping" the golden calf. Catholics and Orthodox Christians who I know explain to me that they "worship" God the Trinity, not the statues, images, etc. I'll admit I'm not very sharp on all of the "rules" of Catholicism, but if you could give me the Catholic church's official position on idol worship, that would be helpful. Thanks.
 
Using any type of idol, statue or picture and kneeling in front of it, lighting candles, praying to it or anything else remotely similar is idolatry.

Something I've found very curious is that people find statues that drip blood, glow, etc....Let's suppose it was real; a God-made miracle.

The point is exactly that: What is the point of seeing a statue of the virgin crying blood, for example?

All the miracles made by Jesus, using the power given to him by his Father (who are NOT one), had a purpose. Bleeding statues have no purpose.

Can someone care to explain this?

kerc
 
madamc, from what I can tell, you are saying that Christianity is inherently hypocritical because it condemns idolatry yet institutionalizes idolatry in it's rituals. Regardless of whether you believe what Christians believe, I think it can be shown that Christianity is consistent with it's view of idolatry.
As madamc pointed out, Moses rebuked the Israelites for worshiping a golden calf, a statue. I agree with madamc that the fact that it was a statue of an animal is insignificant. Whether it was a statue of a human, or a picture, a pizza, or even an idea, worshipping an idol rather than God is considered a sin in Christianity. Are there Christians guilty of hypocritically commiting idolatry? Certainly. I think we can agree from the above discussion that hypocrisy is something all people are prone to commit, and that Christians are no exception. But madamc seemed to be saying that hypocritical idolatry was a regular part of Christianity. She mentioned "looking up to mary, joseph, and jesus" as an example. Christianity does not consider "looking up to" something other than God to be idolatry. If someone were to worship Mary or Joseph as God, Christianity would condemn that. As for Jesus, Christianity considers him God, and therefore certainly should be worshipped. The images and icons used in Christianity are not meant to be worshipped. madamc, you're right, you don't need a statue to worship God. But that doesn't mean that the existence of a statue represents idolatry.
I wrote this in 1 or 2 sentence pieces over the span of 45 minutes, so I'm not sure that it's very coherent. Sorry if I just added to the confusion.
 
ahhh...I just saw melon's post.

Melon, I agree wholeheartedly with you on this one. Well said.
By the way, I think I'll post a new topic on Catholisism and Mary that you might be interested in responding to.
 
G-d is spelled that way in Hebrew, because they don't use vowels in their spelling. Its not a respect thing, its their language.
The Lord's name is not "God"--if it was, you could not verbalize the law without breaking it ("You will not take the Lord your God's name in vain")

Dream Wanderer--in the OT it specifically states that if a man claims that his wife was not a virgin, and it turns out she was not--she was stoned. The sex laws in the OT are sverely slanted to favor the males, but they are there, sex was not allowed (for females at least) before marriage. Joseph even thought of leaving Mary when he found out she was pregnant, because he knew it wasn't his, and did not want to be dishonored by marrying a non-virgin. God convinced him otherwise.

The geneology of Joseph was shown so that those who believed him to be human could accept him as the chosen one because he was descended from the line of David (as was foretold in the OT).

kerc--I don't know that I would credit God for statues that drip blood, etc. The Bible says that Satan will "appear as an angel of light". People flocking to see a statue of Mary for whatever reason takes their eyes off God--the devil's whole goal.

madamc--what is this "Kabbalh"(sp?)--very interesting, would like to check it out.


------------------
"Love is a verb..."
 
I go to a Presbyterian church and we do not have representations of Jesus or any other figure (except for the nativity scene during Christmas).

The existance of statues and Jesus on the cross is one of the arguments Protestants have with Catholics. We figure Jesus has gone to the cross, but is now at the right hand of God.

Having said that, the act of dying on the cross is essential to our faith, because that is the way he atoned for our sins and saved us all. That is important to keep in mind.

Before I became a Christian, I was in a very dangerous situation and, being in a Catholic home, prayed to the crucifix on the wall for safety. God answered my prayer; he sent Jesus.

The bible is very severe in this matter: "You shall not make for yourselves a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them" (Duet 5:8-9a). I take that to include making any picture of anything. The Moslems prohibit drawings of anything but the abstract, after this. But Jesus frees us from the law. He did work on the Sabbath when it was good and right.
 
kabbalah is the foundation of theologies...it's what judaism is based on. remember when g-d told abraham to kill his son? and when he almost did--he thanked abraham for his loyalty and gave him "knowledge"? well kabbalah is that knowledge...secrets of the universe...not until this century has it become available to "common" people. it's a real eye opener.

for real "hardcore" kabbalah, you have to be male, over 30, and married with children. but anyone can study it. i like kabbalah's philosophy and its use of fortune telling
biggrin.gif


a great site to start from is http:www.kabbalah.com

------------------
"What fish don't know"--Marshall McLuhan
Click to expand...

madamc@interference.com
 
madamc, are you a believer in kabala (sp?)? Just curious...

Let me repeat this once again: Catholic statues are NOT idol worship! This is actually a long-running controversy (i.e., the Byzantine Empire once ordered the burning of all icons and statues because the emperor thought it was idol worship), but it all depends on how you view the statue or icon. If you lost the statue, would you feel like God no longer exists? That is idolatry. Do you feel that it is just a visual representation of God who is invisible otherwise, and if the statues were destroyed, would you realize that they were just 'statues'? That is not idolatry. Many of you seem to imply that God is some dim-witted Being in the sky who doesn't know what our true intentions are. I guess I grow weary of that. If you truly believe that praying to statues is idolatry, then don't do it, because it would be in violation of your conscience, but don't start painting everyone with the same brush, just because you dislike and don't understand something.

Melon

------------------
"If I had to choose between the continued possibility of nothing happening and of doing something, I would unquestionably choose the latter...or the former." -- Radiohead
 
I hate threads like these, just bashing for the sake of bashing.

It is an all too common and arrogant mistake for people to believe that God has failed them when in reality, they have failed God.
 
No offense, DebbieSG, but you imply that Catholics are not Christians. I take major offense to that, and just because Catholicism is not your way does not mean we are lesser Christians. Praying to a crucifix is praying to Jesus. We do not believe that the crucifix itself is Jesus, and we, more often, pray to Jesus without a crucifix. I am tired of God being portrayed as some dim-witted, essentialist Being who judges us solely on how our actions are perceived to outsiders, rather than our intentions behind them. He definitely can read our minds, yes?

The Catholic Church put it better in their official statement against fundamentalism. I wholeheartedly agree with its reasoning.

Melon

------------------
"If I had to choose between the continued possibility of nothing happening and of doing something, I would unquestionably choose the latter...or the former." -- Radiohead
 
Sincere question: Then, why use the symbols, idols, etc.?

kerc

------------------
k e r c

Pero no hay nada que temer
Soy todo lo que llevo
El final es el principio de lo nuevo
 
melon, to "you imply that Catholics are not Christians":

No, I was not saying that at all. Please don't take offense. I'm saying that Catholics choose to have Jesus on the Cross, which may be ok. It does seem to go against the law of making images, but if it enhances worship of God, then that would seem to justify it. By Jesus' example, doing what is good is more important than following the law. It is a matter of contention between Catholics and Protestants, BOTH of whom I believe are followers of Christ, and it shouldn't be.

As I said, I prayed to Jesus on the cross and received God's blessing. I was in St. Patrick's church in Ireland (where I attended two masses in other parts of the country) and came up to a woman who stood before a religious statue and felt a strong spiritual presence around her. I also attended an evangelical worship service and felt the holy spirit reaching into the crowd. It's not how we worship, but that we love God and each other!

And don't tag me as a fundamentalist!
 
Well, you had to see my dilemma with one of your statements:

"Before I became a Christian, I was in a very dangerous situation and, being in a Catholic home, prayed to the crucifix on the wall for safety. God answered my prayer; he sent Jesus."

I may have misinterpreted this statement, and I may be a little over-sensitive lately (it's been an odd week at my end), but how I took it originally is that you were Catholic, prayed to a crucifix, which was useless, and then got sent your salvation in "Christian religion," i.e., no longer Catholic. I often get that a lot from the Protestant sects in my area--Catholics are evil, over-ritualistic non-Christians. Anyway, as I reread your quote, I think that that is a misplaced interpretation, and I apologize. I've been on-edge, considering all the debating I've been doing lately! I think that is a cue for me to bow out for a little while...

Anyway, I'm sorry again, and I hope there is no hard feelings!

Melon

------------------
"If I had to choose between the continued possibility of nothing happening and of doing something, I would unquestionably choose the latter...or the former." -- Radiohead
 
U2Bama: You got me there. I didn't know there were different organizations. I just looked on some literature and found that it is from "U.S.A." I go to College Avenue Presbyterian Church in Oakland, CA. I had heard that there was a split between northern and southern denominations, but that they united in 1983. Can you tell me what the difference is?

While I attend this church regurlarly, Christ is more important to me than any particular denomination. I just feel comfortable worshiping in the manner that they do at our church, and feel very much a part of this "family." There is no ethic I espouse that any other Christian wouldn't believe.

If there are splits in denominations, it's really a matter of style. Like Bono saying that Catholicism is "Glamrock." BTW, I suppose that American Presbyterians are different again from those in Ireland. We ought to all get together, leave the church structures behind and praise God together!

Meanwhile, we can sure be thankful that here in America, all these different denominations can coexist without going at each other's throats like they do in Ireland. I pray for unity among us. We are all one body, but different parts. Nuff said?
 
DebbieSG:

The congregation you attend is a member of the Presbyterian Church (USA). It is the oldest group of Presbyterian denominations, and like you said, it was re-unified from 2 groups in 1983. I'm not sure if it was a north/south pattern like the Baptists and Southern Baptists (although you can find strong Southern Baptist congregations anywhere).

The Presbyterian Church (PCA) is a newer group, and I'm not sure if/when the split from USA.

Here in Alabama, the USA group is known for a more formal style of worship but a more liberal stance on social activism (from my experiences, both similar to the United Methodist Church, to which I belong). The PCA group has a more modern style of worship but is more socially conservative.

I didn't realize thhe PCA group was relatively small in relation to the USA group, particularly because the mother PCA churhc in my area (Briarwood Presbyterian) is HUGE and haas also spun off several, fast growing neighborhood congregations. But they are in California and the rest of the nation from what I can tell.
 
what kind of Presbyterian is the Rev. Ian Paisley???????


Dream wanderer

------------------
******* If this be madness,then let us make the most of it!***

at times I felt that I had come a long way only to find that which I sought the most was something I had left behind.

from "Everest:The West Ridge"
 
Originally posted by dream wanderer:
what kind of Presbyterian is the Rev. Ian Paisley???????
Click to expand...

He is a minister of the "Free Presbyterian Church" which to my knowledge is not affiliated with the PCA or USA groups. The focus of their denomination, which is in Europe and North America, seems to be anti-Catholicism and the infallibility of the Bible (w/o the Apocrypha), so he and Melon would have a lot to talk about/debate.

Another group that goes by the name "Presbyterian" is the Cumberland Presbyterian Church, founded in Kentucky and Tennessee prior to the Civil War. These days, they are mainly rural and/or African-American congregations and are characterized by gospel music in conjunction with the beliefs of mainline Presbyterians.



[This message has been edited by U2Bama (edited 03-12-2001).]
 
U2Bama: Thanks for the info! I also learned from my pastor that PCA splintered off because they wanted to be more evangelistic.

Are you affiliated with any church?
 
Originally posted by DebbieSG:
U2Bama: Thanks for the info! I also learned from my pastor that PCA splintered off because they wanted to be more evangelistic.

Are you affiliated with any church?
Click to expand...


That sounds right, knowing what I know about the PCA congregations around here. When I was in high school and college, I know their members were very involved in Campus Life and other youth/college outreach.

I am a member of the United Methodist Church, which I have always been because that's what my family belonged to when I was born, and so was/is my wife. I like the style of worship (which varies from congregation to congregation) and I like the recognition that the UMC gives other Christian denominations (Including Protestant, Catholic & Orthodox) as part of the body of Christ. For example, we have open Communion - anyone is invited to partake, though some members of other denominations choose not to, and that is fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MrsSpringsteen
Gilead States Of America
Replies
16
Views
927
MrsSpringsteen
MrsSpringsteen
S
"Red Zone"
Replies
4
Views
3K
Racerke
R
D
Looking for the best storyteller of U2 - Garage to Stadius
Replies
0
Views
120
Dave A
D
L
Until the End of the World (U2:UV)
Replies
1
Views
110
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
Reggie Thee Dog
Are we NOT discussing the Dolby Atmos Mix of Achtung Baby?
Replies
13
Views
1K
count rushmore
count rushmore

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom