[quote link=topic=150.msg439#msg439 date=1279533062]
These divisions are exactly what Satan wants - if he can get the church arguing about internal matters, then the prime work of "making disciples" tends to be ignored.
I have severe reservations about "multi-faith worship". At best it's bound to degenerate into a politically correct "lowest common denominator" mish-mash. . . .
I'm beginning to ramble, so I'd better leave things there for now and go and do some proper work![/quote]
Hi!
Far from rambling, you make important points.
Whilst I have a wide inter-faith respect and urge others likewise, I agee with you about the degeneration into a mish-mash. Perhaps one might regard as each religion being a different lens through which we can see God, but of course if we cut two different focal length lenses in half and apply them at the same time to the camera, we end up with something that is neither one thing nor the other and an indeterminate image which is out of focus.
On the other hand, we all come into this world naked and we all go out of this world naked. There are many roads in between.
The driving force that takes us long distances might be compared to the combustion of fuel inside an internal combustion engine. It doesn't matter whether the fuel is diesel or petrol as long as one is fired by high compression and the other by a high voltage spark. Some engines might be one cylinder whilst others might need a dozen to move. All are carried upon a framework upon which is mounted bodywork in which many people take great pride washing their cars visibly on weekend mornings whilst others let the rain do the washing. People might argue that their car is better than the next man's or that their colour paint is better than that horrible colour over there. . . . But the colour nor the paint have any meaning without the substrate of the frame carrying the engine within. When we drive our car on the road, the road exists because we are not the only car that drives.
At Albi Cathedral in France, Chaldon Church in Surrey and numerous other places, we see imagery of the Last Judgement, sorting out those who had been good enough and those who hadn't. At the Parthenon in Greece, we walked into the temple celebrating the creation of the First Woman, (the image of the event being upon the podium supporting the statue above) under a frieze which appears to be the first Judgment - in biblical terms of Genesis 6 and Job Chapter 1, the Sons of God appearing to ask "Is it a good idea to make them in our image?", there being a debate between those responsible for human civilisation and those representatives of temptations resulting in sins which are intended to destroy us. Whether it be the First or the Last, the concept remains the same and contemplation of either leads to the same result.
However, I believe that each faction of religion, and indeed each religion, like a lens to which is applied a lens-hood to reduce the glare that dazzles and obscures the image, can focus its texts and teachings through the lens of "Does the way I interpret the meaning of this cause me not to love my God and or to love my neighbour as myself". It's the equivalent of putting on a wide-angle converter to see the bigger picture and thereafter a telephoto attachment or telescope to zoom in to the far view.
It's a challenge, and not an easy one.
I hope that others may continue to pose challenges in this thread, possibly from other religions too, and also in other threads of this section of the forum. A cosy, comfortable concensus merely leads to the self-satisfied invention of a god in our image whereas God the Creator is always challenging, always asking us to ask questions. Qui la Cerca la Troba
Best wishes
David P
These divisions are exactly what Satan wants - if he can get the church arguing about internal matters, then the prime work of "making disciples" tends to be ignored.
I have severe reservations about "multi-faith worship". At best it's bound to degenerate into a politically correct "lowest common denominator" mish-mash. . . .
I'm beginning to ramble, so I'd better leave things there for now and go and do some proper work![/quote]
Hi!
Far from rambling, you make important points.
Whilst I have a wide inter-faith respect and urge others likewise, I agee with you about the degeneration into a mish-mash. Perhaps one might regard as each religion being a different lens through which we can see God, but of course if we cut two different focal length lenses in half and apply them at the same time to the camera, we end up with something that is neither one thing nor the other and an indeterminate image which is out of focus.
On the other hand, we all come into this world naked and we all go out of this world naked. There are many roads in between.
The driving force that takes us long distances might be compared to the combustion of fuel inside an internal combustion engine. It doesn't matter whether the fuel is diesel or petrol as long as one is fired by high compression and the other by a high voltage spark. Some engines might be one cylinder whilst others might need a dozen to move. All are carried upon a framework upon which is mounted bodywork in which many people take great pride washing their cars visibly on weekend mornings whilst others let the rain do the washing. People might argue that their car is better than the next man's or that their colour paint is better than that horrible colour over there. . . . But the colour nor the paint have any meaning without the substrate of the frame carrying the engine within. When we drive our car on the road, the road exists because we are not the only car that drives.
At Albi Cathedral in France, Chaldon Church in Surrey and numerous other places, we see imagery of the Last Judgement, sorting out those who had been good enough and those who hadn't. At the Parthenon in Greece, we walked into the temple celebrating the creation of the First Woman, (the image of the event being upon the podium supporting the statue above) under a frieze which appears to be the first Judgment - in biblical terms of Genesis 6 and Job Chapter 1, the Sons of God appearing to ask "Is it a good idea to make them in our image?", there being a debate between those responsible for human civilisation and those representatives of temptations resulting in sins which are intended to destroy us. Whether it be the First or the Last, the concept remains the same and contemplation of either leads to the same result.
However, I believe that each faction of religion, and indeed each religion, like a lens to which is applied a lens-hood to reduce the glare that dazzles and obscures the image, can focus its texts and teachings through the lens of "Does the way I interpret the meaning of this cause me not to love my God and or to love my neighbour as myself". It's the equivalent of putting on a wide-angle converter to see the bigger picture and thereafter a telephoto attachment or telescope to zoom in to the far view.
It's a challenge, and not an easy one.
I hope that others may continue to pose challenges in this thread, possibly from other religions too, and also in other threads of this section of the forum. A cosy, comfortable concensus merely leads to the self-satisfied invention of a god in our image whereas God the Creator is always challenging, always asking us to ask questions. Qui la Cerca la Troba
Best wishes
David P