The Forum > Article Comments > Paying the price for a crazy war > Comments
Paying the price for a crazy war : Comments
By Antony Loewenstein, published 24/1/2006Antony Loewenstein argues 2005 will be remembered when the world woke up to the reality of the 'war on terror'.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Page 14
-
- All
Posted by coach, Monday, 6 February 2006 8:32:17 AM
| |
Coach,
I answered your questions to me out of courtesy. I can't engage in philosophical debates on religion for I might hurt 'my Jesus'. I am watching your interaction with Aziliz though!. Peace, Posted by Fellow_Human, Monday, 6 February 2006 9:20:41 AM
| |
Thanks Coach for your explanations.
Your wrote (amongst other points of view) that "This is not an elitist self indulgent stance – even though it has all the making of being one – it is purely that light cannot co-exist with darkness". I understand that this is not elitist (and how you come to this truth). My question is not so much about your belief in this truth (which is plainly evident) but in its ability to embrace those who do not believe in your truth. I heard this great explanation about the Christian god on ABC radio by Sister Joan Chittister. Read her lecture: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/relig/spirit/stories/s1288761.htm Posted by Rainier, Monday, 6 February 2006 8:16:06 PM
| |
I don't know what kind of Church she exists in, maybe the cloistered Abbey doesn't get much contact from the outside world. If this is the case then all those things she spoke about are beneficial to her.
Who disagrees that if ritual doesn't help the spirit to come then it is empty. Who disagrees that an emphasis on sin and judgment is a lopsided view of the Gospels? Who disagrees that it is personal encounter with God, "taste and see the goodness of the Lord",sensual experience, that is religion not just thinking about Him. Who disagrees that everyone has been given a little of God's rationality? Such that when we reason about things we discover things, and this need not be strictly theology but every kind of subject. The Sister gets close to pandering to the common murmur of "i don't believe in organised religion". She forgets to mention it is the structures of the Church that enabled her to live out her vocation int he first place. If no one went to church there wouldn't be one in 30 years. Is that what Sister wants? What is really needed today is someone who reminds us of the value of the institutional church. The education, sacraments, teaching, community outreach, worship. Its impossible to be Christian without a community. We're like coals taken out of the fire. The institutional Church is the trellis that supports the vine. Sister seems to be making the common error of ppl who have reached heights in life. "All those rules and regulations about climbing properly. Its not about climbing its about the view - we forget about the view from up here. Forget the fitness and exercise. Look at this view everyone!" Posted by Martin Ibn Warriq, Tuesday, 7 February 2006 5:09:58 AM
|
Do you still check in OLO?
Sorry I did not notice you answered my questions (27/01/06)
Here are my comments:
Point I
You claim to have studied the bible; I find it incredible that all you disagree with is the doctrine of the trinity (and the sonship of Jesus).
TRINITY
The concept of ‘shirk’ in islam is misleading because it assumes that God is associated with other partners.
The concept of the three in one is best understood as three (or more) natures, disposition, states, forms, … of God.
Water for example can exist in liquid, solid, vapour, and a mixture of all 3. But it is one and the same element.
Surely God the creator of all things seen and unseen can decide to be spirit, body, or anything else. We cannot limit God to our own human understanding.
REDEMPTION
It is also amazing that you could have missed the “meat” of the bible i.e. God’s message to humanity.
You see all other world religions are man trying to reach out to a god.
Judeo-Christianity is the ONLY concept where God reached down to man. Incredible but true.
And God (contrary to Allah) does not change his mind.
Point 2 – Therefore Jesus is more than a prophet. He is unique as confirmed in the Qur’an.
That fact alone should make you think and question the validity of the scriptures as the word of God - instead of just relying on your interpreted version of it.
Point 4 – The PASSOVER is a Jewish celebration with a particular significance in the scriptures… it points to salvation by way of the death of the Lamb of God, Easter, the curse of the anti-Christ, the son of God, etc…
By omitting this (and other) notion in your holy book, redemption is so conveniently “by-passed “ reducing Jesus to just a mere prophet.
If "salvation" is by rituals alone - Jesus' death on the cross - (another FACT nicely wiped out in the Qur'an) was a waste of time and a gross error on God's part.