NationStates Jolt Archive

Or can it sometimes not be? I can understand that it would be bigoted and prejudiced to make a criticism of all of a religion's adherents in a blanket statement. But what if the statement is more along the lines of "I do not think tenet X of religion Y is correct because of Z", i.e. a statement about the religion's theology rather than its people?

No.

It's also not prejudiced to critisize the members of a religion as a whole, in my opinion.

Or can it sometimes not be? I can understand that it would be bigoted and prejudiced to make a criticism of all of a religion's adherents in a blanket statement. But what if the statement is more along the lines of "I do not think tenet X of religion Y is correct because of Z", i.e. a statement about the religion's theology rather than its people?
It really depends on how you present your opinion

I don't agree with [insert religion] because they believe [something] and I think that is wrong because [explaination]
is fine

I hate [insert group of people] because they are evil and thier religion did [insert something that the average adherent has no control over]
is borderline, but not a good arguement

[insert religious group] are stupid and they should be jailed for thier idiot beliefs and I hate them and I will always hate them
over the line, looks like a bigot.

Bigot n. One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ
The fact that I despise Catholicism has nothing to do with my being a bigot (which is quite true when it comes to certain other things), since I hate the faith for what it is, not that it is different.

No, I criticise all religions equally. Unfortunately, I only know Chritians, Muslims and Pagans but I would still criticise a Hindu or Jain.

The fact that I despise Catholicism has nothing to do with my being a bigot (which is quite true when it comes to certain other things), since I hate the faith for what it is, not that it is different.

I don't think the given reasons why you dislike something determines entirely whether you're bigoted/prejudiced or not. A racist could say that he dislikes blacks because he thinks they supposedly have certain characteristics, i.e. lazy, stupid or any number of other questionable stereotypes, and not because they're different. Also, the intensity of your feelings affects your bigotry/prejudice as well. Saying you hate and despise something is more an emotional than a logical response, which often underlies a prejudice. This is as opposed to merely criticising or disliking a subject, which, because of the lower emotional intensity, would underlie more ration.

It is not bigoted or prejudiced to criticize something or someone that is bigoted or prejudiced. Furthermore, I believe someone should always have the right to criticize anything if they're knowledgeable about what they're criticizing.

I'm a bigot, it's not a good or rational thing, but I am. It depends on how you present your argument.

Is it always bigoted/prejudiced to criticize religion?
Of course not!
Or can it sometimes not be?
Absolutely.

In fact I'm somewhat intrigued as to what reasoning led you doubt that religion can be critized independent of biggotry and/or prejudice...?:confused:

One cannot belong to a religion without harbouring bigotry and prejudice, so who cares how criticism comes across?

Criticism, it seems to me, has an important role to play in critical thinking. It is a necessary component of any attempt to improve conditions whether they be religious, social, political or psychologial. What is not help is excessive criticism that is intended only to attack ideas and personalities. This kind of criticism is often not done in the open and is somtimes part of a hidden agenda.

In order to solve a problem one needs to be involved in frank and loving consulation that is designed to bring ideas into the discussion with the purpose of allowing all opinions an equal place. The diversity of ideas is the strength of a free society that allows it to bend, change and grow to meet the needs of the people it serves.

Criticism of ideas, policy and social conditions is different than attacks on the person. Our freedoms become chains that enslave us if we are unwilling to temper our emotions and reactions within boundries of decency and compassion.

"'Each of us is responsible for one life only, and that is our
own. Each of us is immeasurably far from being "perfect as our
Heavenly Father is perfect: and the task of perfecting our own
life and character is one that requires all our attention, our
will-power and energy... On no subject are the Bahá'í teachings
more emphatic that on the necessity to abstain from fault-
finding, while being ever eager to discover and root out our own
faults and overcome our own failings.'"

(Compilations, Lights of Guidance, p. 90)

Religious criticism is a wonderful thing, if done properly. Buddhists are well known for engaging in religious dialogue, the purpose being to allow everyone to come away with a correct understanding. Nichiren Daishonin broke it down into three kinds of proof that one can offer for the correctness of their beliefs:

"In judging the relative merit of Buddhist doctrines, I, Nichiren, believe that the best standards are those of reason and documentary proof. And even more valuable than reason and documentary proof is the proof of actual fact."

"Actual proof" is when one can demonstrate that their beliefs produce the results one is seeking.

I would suggest though that when one is criticizing a religion's beliefs, one should take responsibility for providing the correct belief. There are always millions of wrong answers out there and pointing them out is easy. It's much more difficult to point out the right answer.

Criticism, per se, is never a bad thing, even if it feels bad to the one receiving it. (Hey, medecine often tastes bad, doesn't it?) Sure, defend your position if you can, but usually, criticism is a good way to find ways to improve one's arguments/work/etc.

There are different kinds of criticism. Constructive criticism is practical and is meant to identify and help solve specific problems. Destructive criticism is the name given to criticisms that point out problems but don't offer solutions. I don't really buy that as "destructive." Sometimes the solution isn't obvious but that doesn't mean the problem shouldn't be highlighted -- how else to get people working on a solution? When it comes to insults, accusations, put downs (such as all [insert group] are ignorant/criminals/lazy/etc], that's not criticism; that's prejudice. It's criticism to point out that it's prejudice and not fact or a critique. (If you call someone lazy or whatever, you'd better be able to back it up with evidence, or else just acknowledge that it's your bias and drop it.)

I actually think it's okay to be biased about things, as long as you're honest about it and accept that some people might not want to be your friend because of it. I am bigoted against racists, for instance. If I get into a debate with one, I'll let them know that right up front. If you're honest (with yourself, first of all) about your own biases, you should be able to criticize fairly by controlling how your express your criticisms.

One cannot belong to a religion without harbouring bigotry and prejudice, so who cares how criticism comes across?

I think you are way off base there my friend.


25. O SON OF SPIRIT!
Vaunt not thyself over the poor, for I lead him on his way and behold thee in thy evil plight and confound thee for evermore.

26. O SON OF BEING!
How couldst thou forget thine own faults and busy thyself with the faults of others? Whoso doeth this is accursed of Me.

27. O SON OF MAN!
Breathe not the sins of others so long as thou art thyself a sinner. Shouldst thou transgress this command, accursed wouldst thou be, and to this I bear witness.

28. O SON OF SPIRIT!
Know thou of a truth: He that biddeth men be just and himself committeth iniquity is not of Me, even though he bear My name.

29. O SON OF BEING!
Ascribe not to any soul that which thou wouldst not have ascribed to thee, and say not that which thou doest not. This is My command unto thee, do thou observe it.

(Baha'u'llah, The Arabic Hidden Words)

Oh no it's not bigoted, I hate all christian religions equally and without prejudice.

although i have read many bigotted posts about various religions on this forum, its not true that ALL criticizm is bigotted.

after all, when martin luther criticized the catholic church he wasnt being bigotted. he was engaging in necessary and correct criticizm.

I think you are way off base there my friend.


25. O SON OF SPIRIT!
Vaunt not thyself over the poor, for I lead him on his way and behold thee in thy evil plight and confound thee for evermore.

26. O SON OF BEING!
How couldst thou forget thine own faults and busy thyself with the faults of others? Whoso doeth this is accursed of Me.

27. O SON OF MAN!
Breathe not the sins of others so long as thou art thyself a sinner. Shouldst thou transgress this command, accursed wouldst thou be, and to this I bear witness.

28. O SON OF SPIRIT!
Know thou of a truth: He that biddeth men be just and himself committeth iniquity is not of Me, even though he bear My name.

29. O SON OF BEING!
Ascribe not to any soul that which thou wouldst not have ascribed to thee, and say not that which thou doest not. This is My command unto thee, do thou observe it.

(Baha'u'llah, The Arabic Hidden Words)
I'm not off base at all: I fear you've just proven my point for me. Religious convictions are the most solid bedrock for bigotry and prejudice towards differing views of reality in existence.

I'm not off base at all: I fear you've just proven my point for me. Religious convictions are the most solid bedrock for bigotry and prejudice towards differing views of reality in existence.

I think what you said was that one can not belong to a religion without harboring bigtory. "One cannot belong to a religion without harbouring bigotry and prejudice, so who cares how criticism comes across?"

That statement is incorrect. First, how can you possibly know what all members of all religions think. It is impossible. And it shows your own bigtory and prejudice. Breathe not the sins of others.

I think what you said was that one can not belong to a religion without harboring bigtory. "One cannot belong to a religion without harbouring bigotry and prejudice, so who cares how criticism comes across?"

That statement is incorrect. First, how can you possibly know what all members of all religions think. It is impossible. And it shows your own bigtory and prejudice. Breathe not the sins of others.
Nobody is going to believe something which is obviously untrue (as is the case with the philosophy of every religion I've ever heard of) for any reasons other than bigotry. Whether they expect those who do not share their absurd and farcical beliefs to humour them (an insufferable and unfortunately very widespread attitude) or not, Religious beliefs are a manifestation of bigotry, providing nothing more than an excuse to hold one faction of the human race surperior to the rest. That's what Religion is there for.

Nobody is going to believe something which is obviously untrue (as is the case with the philosophy of every religion I've ever heard of) for any reasons other than bigotry. Whether they expect those who do not share their absurd and farcical beliefs to humour them (an insufferable and unfortunately very widespread attitude) or not, Religious beliefs are a manifestation of bigotry, providing nothing more than an excuse to hold one faction of the human race surperior to the rest. That's what Religion is there for.

I think Terry Goodkind said it best: "Given proper motivation almost anyone will believe almost anything. Because people are stupid, they will believe a lie because they want to believe it is true, or because they are afraid it might be true."

This is why I am dismissing the bigotry option when it comes to religion. The reason that many religious groups hold themselves to be superior is not so much as to degrade others but to add value to their own efforts. After all, what good is it to try to help someone if one does not consider what they have to offer valuable?

Nobody is going to believe something which is obviously untrue (as is the case with the philosophy of every religion I've ever heard of) for any reasons other than bigotry. Whether they expect those who do not share their absurd and farcical beliefs to humour them (an insufferable and unfortunately very widespread attitude) or not, Religious beliefs are a manifestation of bigotry, providing nothing more than an excuse to hold one faction of the human race surperior to the rest. That's what Religion is there for.

I don't see any point in getting into a long debate about what you believe to be true of all religion. Let me just say that there is a difference between religion as it was shared with people by the Founder and what is so often called religion today. Good example of that can be found all over the world if one wants to. That is not to say that just because someone claims to represent religion that they really do. Religion should not hold one group on people as superior to another. Clearly, so groups do that. But you statements are just as bigoted as theirs.

Religions true purpose is to bring people closer together. Much of what is called religion today does not do that. All religions are really the same religion. There is no real difference between the teaching of Moses, Christ, Muhammed, Budha and today Baha'u'llah. They spoke with the same tongue.




Should be study the divine religions with the perception of truth, we would then conclude that their underlying principle is the One Reality. All the religions of God are the reality. Reality does not admit multiplicity and division. But alas! that the fundamental reality is laid aside and forgotten, and a catalogue of creeds, dogmas and rites have taken its place which are the basis of differences, the cause of hatred and prejudice, and the establishment of the religion of God is totally forgotten and neglected.

(Compilations, Baha'i Scriptures, p. 303)

O CHILDREN OF MEN!
Know ye not why We created you all from the same dust? That no one should exalt himself over the other. Ponder at all times in your hearts how ye were created. Since We have created you all from one same substance it is incumbent on you to be even as one soul, to walk with the same feet, eat with the same mouth and dwell in the same land, that from your inmost being, by your deeds and actions, the signs of oneness and the essence of detachment may be made manifest. Such is My counsel to you, O concourse of light! Heed ye this counsel that ye may obtain the fruit of holiness from the tree of wondrous glory.

(Baha'u'llah, The Arabic Hidden Words)

I'm a little suspicious of you GoodThoughts because the Baha'i Faith has stated that they want to crush out every single religion in the world and make a single world faith all under their control.

So when the Baha'i say that we're all the same means that they say this just to get everyone on the same page under their direct control.

Religions true purpose is to bring people closer together. Much of what is called religion today does not do that. All religions are really the same religion. There is no real difference between the teaching of Moses, Christ, Muhammed, Budha and today Baha'u'llah. They spoke with the same tongue.
I defy you to find a Religion that has ever done that. All they do is bring small groups of people together, by giving them an excuse to hold in contempt (and in some cases persecute or wage war on) the rest of the human race.
I'd also say there's quite a big difference between Buddhism and the monotheistic desert sects. They're nothing like as nihilistic.

I defy you to find a Religion that has ever done that. All they do is bring small groups of people together, by giving them an excuse to hold in contempt (and in some cases persecute or wage war on) the rest of the human race.
I'd also say there's quite a big difference between Buddhism and the monotheistic desert sects. They're nothing like as nihilistic.

They all did that during the springtime of their civilizations.

Have you never heard of the Baha'i Faith?

http://www.bahai.org/

http://www.bahai.org/dir/bwc

Only any faith that is non-Christian, since Christianity is the established western faith, it contrives to be a legitimate target, whereas other world faiths are not.

Oh no it's not bigoted, I hate all christian religions equally and without prejudice.


Not me, I hate Calvinists and Baptists a little bit more than I hate other Christians.

I'm a little suspicious of you GoodThoughts because the Baha'i Faith has stated that they want to crush out every single religion in the world and make a single world faith all under their control.

So when the Baha'i say that we're all the same means that they say this just to get everyone on the same page under their direct control.

The words of Baha'u'llah are open for anyone to read in several different languages. I have read much of what Baha'u'llah has written and have never read that. Someone has misled you. This is what Baha'u'llah has said.

"Consort with the followers of all religions in a spirit of friendliness and fellowship." Whatsoever hath led the children of men to shun one another, and hath caused dissensions and divisions amongst them, hath, through the revelation of these words, been nullified and abolished. From the heaven of God's Will, and for the purpose of ennobling the world of being and of elevating the minds and souls of men, hath been sent down that which is the most effective instrument for the education of the whole human race."

(Baha'u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 94)

What a bizarre thread title. As far as I'm concerned, criticism of religion is always good.

Only any faith that is non-Christian, since Christianity is the established western faith, it contrives to be a legitimate target, whereas other world faiths are not.

I think I missed something. Please explain.

Or can it sometimes not be? I can understand that it would be bigoted and prejudiced to make a criticism of all of a religion's adherents in a blanket statement. But what if the statement is more along the lines of "I do not think tenet X of religion Y is correct because of Z", i.e. a statement about the religion's theology rather than its people?
Not at all. I do it all the time, thus it is not bigoted.

Only any faith that is non-Christian, since Christianity is the established western faith, it contrives to be a legitimate target, whereas other world faiths are not.
I disagree. I think that Islam is as much of if not more a legitimate target than Christianity. It's not bigoted to criticise either.

The fact that I despise Catholicism has nothing to do with my being a bigot (which is quite true when it comes to certain other things), since I hate the faith for what it is, not that it is different.
What's so objectonable about the Catholics to another Christian. You both follow the same damn book.

What's so objectonable about the Catholics to another Christian. You both follow the same damn book.
Well, my understanding (though it's never REALLY been explained, they're too busy hatin') is that they (other Christians) view us (Catholics) as unwilling to change, too conservative, stuck in the past, retrospective, etc. Which is really funny, when you consider that the Catholic Church, at least in America and a few good chunks of Europe, are by FAR more liberal than many Protestant churches. They view us as lambs for the sacrifice who will follow God and the Pope without question and they seem to believe that this "flawed" idea of Papal Infallibility applies to everything that leaves the Pope's mouth, even something like "Onion bagels just shouldn't be breakfast foods".

I think all criticism comes down to either prejudice OR simple misunderstanding. When I was young, I really came down hard on one of my Jewish friends for what I saw as "wrongs" in her life.....that was before I really pushed myself to study and learn as much as I could about differing religions, especially Islamic and Jewish history, as they're so closely linked to my own faith.
Now I hate Southern Baptists and some Lutherans. That, I admit, is prejudice.

*deep breath*

Come to think of it......that above-mentioned rant on Catholicism is probably how just about everybody views us.......like I said, I've never recieved any feedback that didn't include me personally being attacked, which means I ignore it by default. So....if you'd like to enlighten me....be kind....?

One cannot belong to a religion without harbouring bigotry and prejudice, so who cares how criticism comes across?

I would disagree with that. How do you come to that conclusion?

I would disagree with that. How do you come to that conclusion?

Well, I agree with Cahnt. I believe that conclusion is derived by the following logic:


If you belong to a religion, you obviously believe that that religion is correct.

Logically, you must then believe other religions are wrong.

Therefore, you are "bigoted and prejudiced" against people not of your religion because your very faith dictates that you are "right", and they are "wrong".

Correct me if I have you wrong Cahnt.

The words of Baha'u'llah are open for anyone to read in several different languages. I have read much of what Baha'u'llah has written and have never read that. Someone has misled you. This is what Baha'u'llah has said.

"Consort with the followers of all religions in a spirit of friendliness and fellowship." Whatsoever hath led the children of men to shun one another, and hath caused dissensions and divisions amongst them, hath, through the revelation of these words, been nullified and abolished. From the heaven of God's Will, and for the purpose of ennobling the world of being and of elevating the minds and souls of men, hath been sent down that which is the most effective instrument for the education of the whole human race."

(Baha'u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 94)

I really hate to burst your bubble here, but between the BS quotes and your "holier than thou" attitude is NOT endearing me to you.

And by the way, last I checked (which I'll admit was a year or two ago) it said on your religions OWN WEBPAGE NO LESS! That you intend to become the "One World Faith" and rule the world for all of eternity.

I really hate to burst your bubble here, but between the BS quotes and your "holier than thou" attitude is NOT endearing me to you.

And by the way, last I checked (which I'll admit was a year or two ago) it said on your religions OWN WEBPAGE NO LESS! That you intend to become the "One World Faith" and rule the world for all of eternity.

I'm a little suspicious of you GoodThoughts because the Baha'i Faith has stated that they want to crush out every single religion in the world and make a single world faith all under their control.

So when the Baha'i say that we're all the same means that they say this just to get everyone on the same page under their direct control.

Your quote is in bold. It is your use of inflammatory lauguage that is preventing real discussion. The Baha'i does not intend to crush every religion or any religion, even Islam that has murdered thousands of Baha'is. There is no plan to have everyone under our control. We do have an Administrative Order that is elected freely amoung the Baha'is and gives direction and assistance to Baha'is. You have taken a very little information and twisted it into something it is not.

We believe there is only one God who has sent all revealed religions to humankind. We also believe there is room in this world for people of all different backgrounds and they don't need to be Baha'is.

I'm a little suspicious of you GoodThoughts because the Baha'i Faith has stated that they want to crush out every single religion in the world and make a single world faith all under their control.

So when the Baha'i say that we're all the same means that they say this just to get everyone on the same page under their direct control.

Your quote is in bold. It is your use of inflammatory lauguage that is preventing real discussion. The Baha'i does not intend to crush every religion or any religion, even Islam that has murdered thousands of Baha'is. There is no plan to have everyone under our control. We do have an Administrative Order that is elected freely amoung the Baha'is and gives direction and assistance to Baha'is. You have taken a very little information and twisted it into something it is not.

We believe there is only one God who has sent all revealed religions to humankind. We also believe there is room in this world for people of all different backgrounds and they don't need to be Baha'is.

There is a difference between Inflammatory and Facts.

I did not cross that line into Inflammatory.

It's that simple.

There is a difference between Inflammatory and Facts.

I did not cross that line into Inflammatory.

It's that simple.

Well lets see here you said the Baha'i Faith wants to "crush", called the quotes I used "bs" to name just two unfactual and/or inflammatory statements. But if that's how you feel you are welcome to feel that way. To call your feelings facts is a real leap though. But enough of this. It is not productive and Baha'u'llah forbids this kind of arguing over religion.

Well lets see here you said the Baha'i Faith wants to "crush", called the quotes I used "bs" to name just two unfactual and/or inflammatory statements. But if that's how you feel you are welcome to feel that way. To call your feelings facts is a real leap though. But enough of this. It is not productive and Baha'u'llah forbids this kind of arguing over religion.

Then why did you even speak in the first place?

Religion and belief are by nature topics that people will fight over, squabble over, and kill for.

Oh wait! I get it, you like to argue and fight when it suits your convenience and when you get in too deep you hide behind "My Religion Forbids Me From Fighting" quotes.

How pathetic.

Then why did you even speak in the first place?

Religion and belief are by nature topics that people will fight over, squabble over, and kill for.

Oh wait! I get it, you like to argue and fight when it suits your convenience and when you get in too deep you hide behind "My Religion Forbids Me From Fighting" quotes.

How pathetic.

My last response on this topic to you is this: There is a difference between discussion and fighting. A difference that seems to escape you. I believe the rules of this forum also forbid trolling and baiting which I believe you are practicing and I refuse to sling mud with you.

My last response on this topic to you is this: There is a difference between discussion and fighting. A difference that seems to escape you. I believe the rules of this forum also forbid trolling and baiting which I believe you are practicing and I refuse to sling mud with you.

Neither have I been trolling nor have I baited you in anyway, shape, or form that is of a serious nature.

But then agian Religion is a topic that will enspire anger, hatred, and a level of venom and sarcasm no matter how "Civil" one attempts to keep the conversation.

But then again differences and subtly seems to escape you (in my view).

No.

It's also not prejudiced to critisize the members of a religion as a whole, in my opinion.

Or those black guys, they don't count either eh?


The Three Manliest Men Ever:

1. Leeroy Jenkins

2. Khan

3. The nigga who stole my bike.



I don't think you have much place to talk on this topic. And, yes it is racist to criticize the members of a religion as a whole unless you can find me a religion where all the members believe exactly the same thing and act accordingly.

It isn't always prejudiced and bigoted to criticize a religion, it's just that usually a religion is criticized by people prejudiced against it. It is that simple. I reserve the right to criticize others' doctrine as I allow them that right to criticize my own. However, if you go over that line and go into what is called on this site as "flaming", then it becomes bigoted. I myself try not to be bigoted against other religions, and yea, although my religion is very specific on certain terms, there is only one type of religious people that I could not and will not tolerate personally (though would if I were in charge, just not personally as friends): Christian-based Replacement Theologists who claim the Church has replaced MY (Jewish) People as the people of God, something which insults me greatly, especially since THE NEW COVENANT (New Testament), the overlord of all Christian doctrine, specifically states that this is not the case. (I myself as a Messianic Jew follow the New Covenant, but the Torah (usually translated as "Law") comes first.)

If you belong to a religion, you obviously believe that that religion is correct.

Logically, you must then believe other religions are wrong.

Therefore, you are "bigoted and prejudiced" against people not of your religion because your very faith dictates that you are "right", and they are "wrong".



Actually there are several religions, many sects of Judaism included, which believe that there are many ways to get to the same place. Not all religions believe that those belonging to other faiths are wrong, rather they can be viewed of having a different method of getting to the same place. This view treats religion more as an expedient - as a means of learning how to live a good, moral life, yet most religions do not claim to be the only way to live morally, only to be one of the many ways.

Moreover, arguing against somebody's point of view is not bigoted, it is just disagreement. To make the somewhat unjustifiable assertion that people of another faith are wrong is not discriminating against those people, merely disagreeing with them in an slightly disrespectful manner. Just as politicians who engage in the phenomena we like to call 'Bushbashing' - making fun of our president and his supporters - are merely asserting their point of view, to hold that those of another religion are wrong is not discriminating against them, merely stating an opinion. While it might not be justified or correcy, it is certainly not bigoted.

It isn't always prejudiced and bigoted to criticize a religion, it's just that usually a religion is criticized by people prejudiced against it. It is that simple. I reserve the right to criticize others' doctrine as I allow them that right to criticize my own. However, if you go over that line and go into what is called on this site as "flaming", then it becomes bigoted. I myself try not to be bigoted against other religions, and yea, although my religion is very specific on certain terms, there is only one type of religious people that I could not and will not tolerate personally (though would if I were in charge, just not personally as friends): Christian-based Replacement Theologists who claim the Church has replaced MY (Jewish) People as the people of God, something which insults me greatly, especially since THE NEW COVENANT (New Testament), the overlord of all Christian doctrine, specifically states that this is not the case. (I myself as a Messianic Jew follow the New Covenant, but the Torah (usually translated as "Law") comes first.)

I don't believe that I have ever heard of Replacement Theologist before. I have heard of Messianic Jews before but don't know what they believe. Can you better inform me?

I don't believe that I have ever heard of Replacement Theologist before.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersessionism
Don't worry, I about fell out of my chair the first time somebody told me about it. It was in a debate round, but luckily the judge was laughing harder than I was.

As far as Messianic Judaism, all I will say is that they have a fairly err...different view of religious philosophy than many traditional Jews. It's not neccesarily wrong, but it is a bit far away from the core beliefs of Judaism.

Simonist']Well, my understanding (though it's never REALLY been explained, they're too busy hatin') is that they (other Christians) view us (Catholics) as unwilling to change, too conservative, stuck in the past, retrospective, etc. Which is really funny, when you consider that the Catholic Church, at least in America and a few good chunks of Europe, are by FAR more liberal than many Protestant churches. They view us as lambs for the sacrifice who will follow God and the Pope without question and they seem to believe that this "flawed" idea of Papal Infallibility applies to everything that leaves the Pope's mouth, even something like "Onion bagels just shouldn't be breakfast foods".

I think all criticism comes down to either prejudice OR simple misunderstanding. When I was young, I really came down hard on one of my Jewish friends for what I saw as "wrongs" in her life.....that was before I really pushed myself to study and learn as much as I could about differing religions, especially Islamic and Jewish history, as they're so closely linked to my own faith.
Now I hate Southern Baptists and some Lutherans. That, I admit, is prejudice.

*deep breath*

Come to think of it......that above-mentioned rant on Catholicism is probably how just about everybody views us.......like I said, I've never recieved any feedback that didn't include me personally being attacked, which means I ignore it by default. So....if you'd like to enlighten me....be kind....?

My main problem with the Catholic church is that they have rules that I don't understand why they have them or why they are unwilling to change them

for example my daughter has celiac disease, wheat, rye, barley, ect. is toxic to her. I found out that the Catholic church has a rule that says that communion wafers have to have wheat in them, or it doesn't count. I do not understand the scriptural backing for this and don't understand what the problem with a gluten free wafer would be. Most of the Catholics that I know don't understand why either since the church has substituted the wine for grape juice for alchoholics.

here is a linkhttp://www.csaceliacs.org/CDintheNews/NJCoastStar080304.php with some info in case you need it to explain.... I think most of my problem is that I am ignorant as to why things are the way they are in the Catholic church, it all seems very legalistic to me....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supersessionism
Don't worry, I about fell out of my chair the first time somebody told me about it. It was in a debate round, but luckily the judge was laughing harder than I was.

As far as Messianic Judaism, all I will say is that they have a fairly err...different view of religious philosophy than many traditional Jews. It's not neccesarily wrong, but it is a bit far away from the core beliefs of Judaism.

Thanks. Very interesting. Really not far removed from what the Baha'i Faith teaches about the interconnectedness of all revealed religions.

My main problem with the Catholic church is that they have rules that I don't understand why they have them or why they are unwilling to change them

for example my daughter has celiac disease, wheat, rye, barley, ect. is toxic to her. I found out that the Catholic church has a rule that says that communion wafers have to have wheat in them, or it doesn't count. I do not understand the scriptural backing for this and don't understand what the problem with a gluten free wafer would be. Most of the Catholics that I know don't understand why either since the church has substituted the wine for grape juice for alchoholics.

here is a linkhttp://www.csaceliacs.org/CDintheNews/NJCoastStar080304.php with some info in case you need it to explain.... I think most of my problem is that I am ignorant as to why things are the way they are in the Catholic church, it all seems very legalistic to me....
Oh, Smunkee, I forgot about your daughter, I'm sorry. Yeah, I've seen you bring this up before. I think I made a point back then to talk to my priest about it, but by the time he'd gotten back to me that particular thread was long gone, and far be it for me to gravedig. [/angelic BS]

Actually a lot of American congregations don't always follow that in special cases. It is a pretty straight-set law, but many of the priests who are aware of this disorder will appeal to their Bishop or Cardinal. Usually it's somewhat of a process, but I know it sometimes works; one of the girls who's currently in the youth program I'm co-leader of every Sunday had to use different wafers for her First Communion.
I'm not sure if you're aware, but in northern Missouri there's a convent (it's in Clyde, in case you're curious) for the Benedictine Sisters of Perpetual Adoration. Very nice architecture. They're the largest Catholic supplier of communion wafers in the United States, and I know that about 1/20th of that is specially made for people with celiac disease.
Again, it usually does probably come down to a case-to-case basis, and I'm sure that, as is the case with MANY situations in today's world, for every piece of bad press they get on the topic, there are many more positive stories not being told (like Janna, the girl I mentioned, who will pretty much use these wafers twice a week for the rest of her life).

And as to your claimed "ignorance" to why things are as they are in our Church.....can't really help. Most of us don't know. Most of us don't look into things at a level above our own congregation, or maybe the Dioces to which we belong. I count myself among the lucky few that have taken the initiative to meet the highest officials I could get my paws on.....and it certainly helps if the Cardinal was a childhood friend of your priest :D

We are not away from the Core Basis of Judaism!!! That's the Jews for Jesus!!! I AM NOT, NEVER WAS, NOR EVER WILL BE A JEW FOR JESUS!!!

Now that that's out of my system, I am a strict Torah Jew. I just do not follow the Talmud nor the Kabbalah, because I don't give, pardon my language, a rat's a** what the Rabbis said thousands of years after the Law. Though Messianic prophesy is kind of obvious (to me), which is why I'm a Messianic Jew -

TORAH = T-V-R-H = Tav-Vav-Resh-Hey
In ultra-ancient hebrew, the language was pictographic, like Chinese, ergo:
Tav-Vav-Resh-Hey = Cross-Nail-Highest-Behold = Behold, to a Cross is Nailed the Highest.

- My favorite prophesy.

Simonist']Oh, Smunkee, I forgot about your daughter, I'm sorry. Yeah, I've seen you bring this up before. I think I made a point back then to talk to my priest about it, but by the time he'd gotten back to me that particular thread was long gone, and far be it for me to gravedig. [/angelic BS]

Actually a lot of American congregations don't always follow that in special cases. It is a pretty straight-set law, but many of the priests who are aware of this disorder will appeal to their Bishop or Cardinal. Usually it's somewhat of a process, but I know it sometimes works; one of the girls who's currently in the youth program I'm co-leader of every Sunday had to use different wafers for her First Communion.
I'm not sure if you're aware, but in northern Missouri there's a convent (it's in Clyde, in case you're curious) for the Benedictine Sisters of Perpetual Adoration. Very nice architecture. They're the largest Catholic supplier of communion wafers in the United States, and I know that about 1/20th of that is specially made for people with celiac disease.
Again, it usually does probably come down to a case-to-case basis, and I'm sure that, as is the case with MANY situations in today's world, for every piece of bad press they get on the topic, there are many more positive stories not being told (like Janna, the girl I mentioned, who will pretty much use these wafers twice a week for the rest of her life).

And as to your claimed "ignorance" to why things are as they are in our Church.....can't really help. Most of us don't know. Most of us don't look into things at a level above our own congregation, or maybe the Dioces to which we belong. I count myself among the lucky few that have taken the initiative to meet the highest officials I could get my paws on.....and it certainly helps if the Cardinal was a childhood friend of your priest :D

thank you for explaining. I am glad that there are some people who will make exception. I actually do have a friend who is Catholic, but he can't answer many questions because he just converted, he had his first communion last week, he claims that he will ask his priest all the stuff I want to know, but I want to go talk to the preist, turns out he is too busy for a conversation with a protestant that isn't looking to convert (to be fair the conversation could take hours since I have a lot of questions) I am not trying to put down Catholics or anything I am just like I said ignorant and think if I understood more that I would be more understanding.
(if that made any sense at all);)