One Way: the reason why Christian ecumenicalism is impossible

[holysmoke]

It's too funny - there's no bias here, because the whole site is built on the platform of neutrality.

However, some members have their own personal agendas and try and inject that into the forums.

It's pretty laughable, though, and best ignored.

Thank you, Bandit, for confirming reality on this forum for me. The fact that you are still here gives me encouragement although at any time when logging in I expect Brian's ever-so "neutral" "You are banned. When will the ban be lifted. Never." My beef with this forum does not just stem from my current membership. Brian really does need these reality checks to understand that this forum is far from "neutral" when it comes to Christian beliefs being seriously expressed by Christian members. How can we talk about the reasons why Jesus was so opposed to Pharaisic Judaism for example if no one here is allowed to diss Judaism? Without the ability to express our Christian beliefs, this is becomes a sham interfaith forum, at least for us Christians.

When I call for freedom to express Christian beliefs honestly I am not calling for special treatment of Christians but for intellectual honesty. As some of you may have gathered by now, I believe that two or more spiritual truths that are essentially diametrically opposed to each other can never come to a place of mutual respect and harmony of believers. I really think "ecumenicalism" is a totally fraudulent intellectual concept that just wants to put a Happy Face over real, serious, disagreements between religionists, e.g. Christianity with its belief in Jesus Christ as representing the Son of God and Judaism and Islam which are both intolerant of such polytheistic conceptionalization of the Godhead. The lack of reality for harmonious interfaith relationships keeps reappearing, e.g. the current Pope's relationship with Jews and Judaism. These interfaith attempts to cover over major disagreements are doomed to fall apart as soon as the spiritual leaders get back home and face their constituencies. Most every religion contains a Golden Rule but who practices it when it comes to religious believers, each thinking their religion is THEE ONE and ONLY, like I do with my particular brand of gnostic Christianity.

This is why I think it is wiser to acknowledge these strong differences and, well, just fight it out in an open arena of debate. Let the natural urges express themselves that want to show why one's religious beliefs or lack of them is better for the world than someone else's. I believe this is the way all leading ideas come to fruition, they are placed without protection out into the real world to withstand or crumble before their critics, and this is a good thing because the winners of the intellectual/spiritual contests have proven themselves against all comers and people following the winning ideas have confidence in their beliefs being really true to reality, spiritual or mundane. Without conflict of ideas, you get mush instead of sacrificial mutton

 

[wil]

Without the ability to express our Christian beliefs, this is becomes a sham interfaith forum, at least for us Christians...I believe that two or more spiritual truths that are essentially diametrically opposed to each other can never come to a place of mutual respect and harmony of believers. I really think "ecumenicalism" is a totally fraudulent intellectual concept that just wants to put a Happy Face over real, serious, disagreements between religionists.... every religion contains a Golden Rule but who practices it when it comes to religious believers, each thinking their religion is THEE ONE and ONLY, like I do with my particular brand of gnostic Christianity. ...Let the natural urges express themselves that want to show why one's religious beliefs or lack of them is better for the world than someone else's. I believe this is the way all leading ideas come to fruition, they are placed without protection out into the real world to withstand or crumble before their critics, and this is a good thing because the winners of the intellectual/spiritual contests have proven themselves against all comers and people following the winning ideas have confidence in their beliefs being really true to reality, spiritual or mundane. Without conflict of ideas, you get mush instead of sacrificial mutton

Namaste Sonoman,

So as I understand it, you feel that this site is an interfaith sham because we are trying to understand each other and get along...but also that interfaith in general is a joke and a lie because obviously one religon is better than the other...not only that you have the answer in that you have your brand of gnostic Christianity that should we all give you the forum we must gladly succumb to?

And that every forum should be a place where you can post without being disrupted whilst dissing others beliefs and this will allow the cream rise to the top and show once and for all all the useless religions?

And in the past you've expressed your beliefs and been banned.

And how has that worked in other forums? And why have you come back here again?

I ask as I wonder why folks that dislike the methods and people of this location wish to return.

 

[iBrian]

Thank you, Bandit, for confirming reality on this forum for me. The fact that you are still here gives me encouragement although at any time when logging in I expect Brian's ever-so "neutral" "You are banned. When will the ban be lifted. Never." My beef with this forum does not just stem from my current membership. Brian really does need these reality checks to understand that this forum is far from "neutral" when it comes to Christian beliefs being seriously expressed by Christian members. How can we talk about the reasons why Jesus was so opposed to Pharaisic Judaism for example if no one here is allowed to diss Judaism? Without the ability to express our Christian beliefs, this is becomes a sham interfaith forum, at least for us Christians.

Oh, right - so one person accuses me of a pro-Christian bias, and now I'm being accused of an anti-Christian bias.

Come on, folks, make up your mind - which bias are you actually accusing me of?

 

[wil]

Oh, right - so one person accuses me of a pro-Christian bias, and now I'm being accused of an anti-Christian bias.

Come on, folks, make up your mind - which bias are you actually accusing me of?

I accuse you of creating a forum where folks can openly discuss ideas. And putting into place a system where by a group of people largely unknown to you regulate and moderate so the majority can enjoy or whine at will, yet gnats and mosquitos are discouraged or eliminated.

I accuse you of spending an inordinate amount of time, effort, money in creating and maintaining the above and thank you for it.

 

[Bandit]

It's too funny - there's no bias here, because the whole site is built on the platform of neutrality.

However, some members have their own personal agendas and try and inject that into the forums.

It's pretty laughable, though, and best ignored.

Balogny. Ignoring your bias does not make it go away. Just because you think you are a notch above humanity and could never inject your personal bias in your opinions does not make it so. We never appear in our own personal mirror the way we do to others. What makes you so special? That is what is laughable. I have no problem with you having biased opinions and not liking other peoples bias, because everyone has them -including you-. Having a bias does not always mean someone is a bad person. You might think to yourself that you can speak 5000 times without bias and have no personal agendas of your own, and you might even convince a few of all of that, but you wont fool all the people all the time.

I accept it for what it is And, I dont expect it to ever change.

 

[Bandit]

I really think "ecumenicalism" is a totally fraudulent intellectual concept that just wants to put a Happy Face over real, serious, disagreements between religionists

I do too. Interfaith attempts to hush the real problems while discarding the core of the religions as necessary. It is like a fraudulent thing. I think most people do realize that it can not be resolved but they try to keep it hush hush and pretend that it can. More like a false hope? It seeks to make each religion a spoke without a wheel in the middle of the wheel as in a crippling effect. I think it worked a little better when people actually compared the religions than trying to mush it all into one thing.

It is pretty bizzare.

 

[wil]

I do too. Interfaith attempts to hush the real problems while discarding the core of the religions as necessary. It is like a fraudulent thing. I think most people do realize that it can not be resolved but they try to keep it hush hush and pretend that it can. More like a false hope? It seeks to make each religion a spoke without a wheel in the middle of the wheel as in a crippling effect. I think it worked a little better when people actually compared the religions than trying to mush it all into one thing.

It is pretty bizzare.

How is it that incredible scientists, philospophers, theologians, philanthropists...come from all variety of religions? I get from folks that believe their way is the one and only way (and that isn't from just one denomination or religion, but a number of them) anyway they express the other religion as evil. Yet how could such wealth of love, compassion and knowledge come from such evil...I personally think G!d is involved in it all.

So sure we can point to the issues with other belief systems but only if we are willing to be open to the inequity of our own beliefs. As each religion also creates its number of unethical, imorral and harmful folks...yet when we are in that we discount that as an anomoly.

 

[Nick_A]

It's too funny - there's no bias here, because the whole site is built on the platform of neutrality.

However, some members have their own personal agendas and try and inject that into the forums.

It's pretty laughable, though, and best ignored.

I don't believe you are aware of your bias which is typical for an advocate of secular Interfaith. It is the bias in favor of the lowest politically correct common denominator. By definition this bias denies revelation of the highest objective common denominator which is the essence of Transcendent Interfaith. Without an awareness of the distinction between the two, an advocate of secular Interfaith simply cannot understand neutrality.

 

[wil]

I don't believe you are aware of your bias which is typical for an advocate of secular Interfaith. It is the bias in favor of the lowest politically correct common denominator. By definition this bias denies revelation of the highest objective common denominator which is the essence of Transcendent Interfaith. Without an awareness of the distinction between the two, an advocate of secular Interfaith simply cannot understand neutrality.

Seems there are a number of folks on this site that feel they could create a better one. Better rules, better neutrality, better format, more compassion. Please email me the link to your new site when you've created it.

My preacher over the past 15 years has gotten much input from the members of our congregation...the talks are too long...you should do this this way...you should x, y and z... But his point has been he is creating his congregation, folks that want to study and learn in a way he is comfortable with teaching. And year after year it steadily grows and folks either leave because they don't like it, or stay for the portions that they do like.

It seems pretty arrogant to come to someone elses house and expect them to re-upholster the furniture because you don't like the fabric.

 

[Bandit]

How is it that incredible scientists, philospophers, theologians, philanthropists...come from all variety of religions? I get from folks that believe their way is the one and only way (and that isn't from just one denomination or religion, but a number of them) anyway they express the other religion as evil. Yet how could such wealth of love, compassion and knowledge come from such evil...I personally think G!d is involved in it all.

So sure we can point to the issues with other belief systems but only if we are willing to be open to the inequity of our own beliefs. As each religion also creates its number of unethical, imorral and harmful folks...yet when we are in that we discount that as an anomoly.

I understand. I think what you have said is a more honest way. This forum is what made me reject the christian religions but not for the same reasons that someone else might reject it. That does not mean it can't be fraudulent or an imposter involved. Every religion thinks they are the only right way and at some point they will in fact conflict with each other and they often contradict themselves. Instead of saying they are all right I would be more apt to admit they are all flawed/wrong, including my own flaws.

Then again, in my own bias which I have no problem admitting, I view the institutionalized religions as frauds & phoney bills. Some are very good at buying with fake bills. This might actually be the window to all of this but certainly not something I would trust or exault. Perhaps it is religion itself that is the fraud? Jesus also had no problem rejecting the screwed up religions of his day. Why would he be any different today? I never thought of it that way before. I just choose not to belong to any religion including an interfaith religion-and I am much happier.

 

[Nick_A]

Seems there are a number of folks on this site that feel they could create a better one. Better rules, better neutrality, better format, more compassion. Please email me the link to your new site when you've created it.

My preacher over the past 15 years has gotten much input from the members of our congregation...the talks are too long...you should do this this way...you should x, y and z... But his point has been he is creating his congregation, folks that want to study and learn in a way he is comfortable with teaching. And year after year it steadily grows and folks either leave because they don't like it, or stay for the portions that they do like.

It seems pretty arrogant to come to someone elses house and expect them to re-upholster the furniture because you don't like the fabric.

Yes, but if "neutrality" means something but we don't know what it means, why settle for politically correct imagination? What objective good does this imagination serve?

 

[wil]

[/b]

Yes, but if "neutrality" means something but we don't know what it means, why settle for politically correct imagination? What objective good does this imagination serve?

It serves me and if it didn't I wouldn't be here. But I wonder for those that it doesn't serve why they are...

I guess I answered my own question. I am here for my growth, I am selfish. I am here to share and gleen. However there are some here because they are here for others growth, they feel the need to tell others they have the answer and for us to join them.

Interesting part...does everyone wish to save everyone? I mean, am I on everyone's list to get me on your side? Or have some of you given up on me? Do the muslims want me to take my trip to mecca? Do our bahai brothers want me to cut my hair? The Christians want me to have a different experience on my road to Damascus? Does Thomas want me in the Catholic fold? Would FS and Dor like me to become a bible thumper? Is mee waiting for me to walk thru the doors of Kingdom Hall? or the Hindus, Sufi, Sikh, or whatever...is sonoman still waiting for me to buy his book, or Tao anxiously wanting me to toss in the towel? Or nick should I sing your tune and condemn the FEC and join the lynching? Interestingly enough I know BB and Dauer and the Buddhists don't care, they are working on their own growth....I am too, but I'm suddenly wondering, who wants me to join them, and who has given up?

 

[Nick_A]

It serves me and if it didn't I wouldn't be here. But I wonder for those that it doesn't serve why they are...

Understanding the nature of resistance.

The world is at a difficult time in its history. We are rapidly advancing technologically but the nature of our being that produces both acts of compassion and atrocities, has remained the same. The point is that our skill in the expression of atrocities has advanced due to technology and this pragmatic interest will continue to develop.

Secular Interfaith and the imagination it is built upon contributes to the problem. We need a more neutral objective approach then it can offer so is it that surprising why I am interested in this whole question of imagination that denies us attributes like neutrality?

Why worry about joining? Water seeks its own level. What you will join will be at your level. The question becomes how to change ones level rather than worrying about who to join.

 

[path_of_one]

I doubt many people will like my view, but being a mod on another board (on a totally different area of life, a much more light-hearted area, thank God) I can say that this site is pretty open-ended about what it tolerates. On the other board I mod at, people are kicked off routinely for all kinds of things and they don't get second chances, infractions, or discussion on the matter. While everyone may cry "Oh noes, so unfair!"...

It is fair. This site belongs to someone and he invests his time, money, and effort into it. Even if Brian were incredibly biased, it's his site.

So when people just whine and complain about how it doesn't function according to their own standards, and they don't like interfaith work anyway, and they're getting nothing out of the process, I ask why are you here???

A note to you all: there are easy, free discussion boards to be had out there that you can make conform to your every whim and desire. You can construct them, moderate them, and find new members. You can use them any way you wish.

So, why would people hang out when they avowedly get "nothing" out of this "biased" "sham" of a site?

1. Because they're lazy. They don't want the work of getting their own board and would rather use someone else's and stamp their feet at not having their way.
2. Because they realize that any discussion board takes time to build membership, and they're impatient. They don't want to start from scratch, doing things their way, and having to wait to gain thousands of members. They want to use the members elsewhere and then stamp their feet at not having their way.

Sorry to be blunt, but if someone isn't getting anything from the board, why bother coming here? There are thousands of religion forums out there, or you could create your very own.

As for the capacity and reality of interfaith- you take from it what you put into it. Personally, I have had practically no problems on the board or in real life with finding and exploring the real differences (and also real similarities) between religions. Just because I disagree with this or that point doesn't mean I have to be rude or disrespectful about it. Being mostly polite doesn't mean I'm dishonest. Being willing to learn from other religions doesn't mean I don't recognize the discrepancies between their ideas and my own.

 

[Bandit]

Seems there are a number of folks on this site that feel they could create a better one. Better rules, better neutrality, better format, more compassion. Please email me the link to your new site when you've created it.


It seems pretty arrogant to come to someone elses house and expect them to re-upholster the furniture because you don't like the fabric.

I would never create a religion forum and I would never expect neutrality or compassion from them. I don't view this forum as any different or special from any other religon forum I have visited and I would never expect it to change the fabric. I had my account deleted at the other religion forum I belonged to and wont be joining a new one. The other religion forum I went to was disolved. I do pretty good these days at accepting things for what they are and telling it exactly how I see it which is an achievment for me. I do not view forums as a house or a home, more like a populace area, an amusement park where you buy tickets, stand in line and pay thru contributions and so I would expect rif raf, scratches, dents, rules, but I would also expect line jumping and pick pocketing... Religion tends to bring that element. I would like to think I am smart enough not to bring something of value that can be taken from me on a whim. That is typical of internet forums in general. If the mud slinging park wishes to throw me out of it, then I leave and I always have the option not to visit which I do take advantage of. No biggie. I would do the same with those I do not want on my property and throw them off, though my property is private instead of public and I would never put a sign out saying everyone welcome and join.

I have also learned not to make serious investments and give too much credit or praise to things I have no control over, like public forums, politics, ball games, explosions, war, religion, weather... I also do not view myself as part of the "community", rather a visitor to something that some view as a community. There are some here that I do enjoy the company of and I am certain there are those who can do without my company. Not a problem.

It has never handled/welcomed criticism well, but no public forums do. Problems are pacified and never actually resolved mostly because there is no resolution. I accept that but then to me it is more like a carnival, not something I take serious. As a ride conductor, you do take the time to address a situation with safety, intellectual honesty, you do stay on the track and present options and admit to your biases, instead of passing out the eternal supply of pacifiers that is so common here. And, that I do respect. I just happen to be one of those riders who will jump off the train early in the ride.

That is what I call long winded yappering. I think my contribution of payment fits well with the decor

 

[Bandit]

I ask why are you here???

Because you are one of my favorites. I don't have to like the agenda/bias of religion forums to still like you.

 

[wil]

Because you are one of my favorites. I don't have to like the agenda/bias of religion forums to still like you.

ditto, on poo and you and most of the posters here. While I often disagree with many...doesn't mean I don't learn from them.

Then of course there are those here that are to teach me patience, and those that teach me tolerance, and those that teach me compassion...

The funny thing is that darned mirror. Odds are the same issues I have with them are the issues they have with me!

Again, I still have to say...I feel this thread is a perfect example of the OP

One Way: the reason why Christian ecumenicalism is impossible

One can't be one way and have a discussion forum...you can only do that from the pulpit where you don't allow the congregation to question.

 

[Nick the Pilot]

Wil,

I agree with you that some people say this Forum is too Christian-biased, while others say it is too anti-Christian, and that there is no way to keep everyone happy. This ties nicely into the topic of this thread, which is the clear Christian bias against ecumenicalism. Even Thomas and the Pope have clearly spoken out against ecumenicalism.

Christians think that Mahatma Gandhi (one of the greatest people of the last century), who chose not to follow Jesus, is burning in Hell at this very moment. Christians must accept the fact that their philosophy condemns Gandhi so fiercely. They cannot have their cake and eat it too. Gandhi is either burning or not burning right now -- it comes down to this very clear either/or. Christians must face the fact that their faith forces them to believe Gandhi is in fact burning as we speak.

This Forum gives us a chance to point out how anti-ecumenical Christianity really is, so this Forum serves a good purpose.

 

[Paladin]

i just keep coming here cuz snoopy and seattlegal bring really good snacks

 

[Bandit]

Again, I still have to say...I feel this thread is a perfect example of the OP One can't be one way and have a discussion forum...you can only do that from the pulpit where you don't allow the congregation to question.

but isn't everyone one way? their way?

If it is ok for people to reject jesus and make him the wrong way, which they in fact do and that is tolerated, then why is it so bad if people accept jesus as the right way? I have to say it one more time, the belief that Jesus is the right way and only way to the father has never been tolerated here. I think that is the OP. What are people so afraid of? That does not mean that people do not feel that others should be free to believe how they choose. They just believe their way is the right way. Everyone does that with conflict of interest. *This is where interfaith becomes bogus.

The implication of that is, Christ is/was not neccessary because you can pick something different and trash that one...ok fine. And perhaps that is what is in the agenda after all. The story of jesus is one of the biggest conflicts in of all these religions today and that is why they killed him then.

I think it was Dream who said the wisest thing here ever about it, and that was, The solution is, there is no solution.

*Do you want to know one reason why I dont believe what others believe? Because I believe what they believe is incomplete and/or is a lie...the same way some people believe jesus is the/a messiah is a lie, the same way others believe that mohammed a prophet is a lie, the same way that some believe hell is a lie, the same way the bias on this forum has a jesus who never raised from the dead and to them it is a lie or an addition that never happened, the same way some believe it was judas who was crucified, and jesus being crucified is a lie to them. It is so simple to me which is why the wisest ones of all never/rarely talk about this hoopla stoopla no solution train wreck. I wonder what it actually looks like to an innocent bystander? LOL!

It is obvious that someone repeated more than one lie and so you have to decide for yourself which ones are the lies and what isn't & hope you make the right and most informed decision, much like the dating game or let's make a deal.

ditto, on poo and you and most of the posters here. While I often disagree with many...doesn't mean I don't learn from them.

ditto.

Do you want to know what else I have learned here? Never under any circumstance, waste time standing up for someones institutionalized religion and if I do, I don't expect the favor returned. I had to attend the school of hard knocks for that. So yah, I have learned a few things too.

The funny thing is that darned mirror.

I don't look so good in the mirror. And on that note, it was again my pleasure and I am done here for awhile. L8r, Wil