\"Rules for the Forum\"

Since Christians (a lot of) believe that Christ, the Holy Spirit and the Father are God their picture of that one God is Trinitarian. The Hebrews are very cautious even to give a name to their God etc. Would a title monotlitic be just?

Neaj Pa Bol wrote:

Justice wrote:

Maybe we could rename it the \"Monolithic Rite\", lol. They all do have the common factor of believing in just one god. Just have to toss a definition/explaination into the mix so folks know what it is.

Interesting subject, but I would like some imput if we have members of the Jewish or Muslim faith to help in this discussion. We just may need to have additional rites for them if they wish to not be so closely related to Christianity or maybe a sub-rites under a main title to cover all three that can come to an agreement of Monolithic or another name....

Definitely need to chew Tom's ear a bit when he gets back....

The situation is better justified if additional compensatory rites were introduced.

Well, the trinity is just three identities of one God. So I think Mono would still fit.

Justice wrote:

Well, the trinity is just three identities of one God. So I think Mono would still fit.

They are actually three seperate persons.

Sorry about going on about this but I feel it is important to understand, and it has been a point of conflict for centuries. In Christian Theology we have God as being three distinct persons in one Substance. In Judaism and Islam there is only one Person and that is God.

I understand that. But the 3 seperate \"persons\" make the one God. In modern Christianity, you will be hard pressed to find someone to say they actually worship the three seperatly. They will say they worship the 3-in-1 and refer to him as the one true God, just like the Jews and Muslims do. I know in the Baptist sect of Christianity that I grew up in and was training to be a minister in from the time I was 16 til 21, God the father, God the son, and God the Holy Spirit were referred to seperatly, but worshiped as one. They hold to the holy trinity, but under one name and that the name of God. Don't get me wrong, I completely see and grasp your point about Judaism and Islam.

As a jedi who grew up a muslim, I would not mind it one bit to be in the same category as a christian or jew. It is the point that the three religions worship one deity, trinity or whatever. Maybe we could rename the rites from Christian to monotheism, Buddhist to Esoterica, Wicca to magick, and the pure land and Sith would remain the same name. Even if my name change suggestions don't fit, at least I feel my point was made concerning the renaming regardless of what the rites are actually renamed to.

Yeah, I have to agree with Sekhu_Ba_Ra ... I do think it is very confusing in the naming of the different rites and as well a bit separating ... although still we are all jedi, aren't we ?

I can really appreciate this, and after all we are all Jedi. I actually feel fine with the things as they are. But we have to remember that our Temple has a public character. Imagine having to negotiate with a Muslim or Jew and telling them that we consider their faith to be a part of the Christian Rite.

Jon wrote:

I can really appreciate this, and after all we are all Jedi. I actually feel fine with the things as they are. But we have to remember that our Temple has a public character. Imagine having to negotiate with a Muslim or Jew and telling them that we consider their faith to be a part of the Christian Rite.

It would actually be more accurate to put it as \"The Abrahamic Rite\" since they are all Abrahamic religions. However, there is no need to make changes to these simply because of words. Semantics is not something which need be worried about.

But this is going to need some mind bending. Sounds like a fun task. Hmmmm.

Twsoundsoff wrote:

Jon wrote:

I can really appreciate this, and after all we are all Jedi. I actually feel fine with the things as they are. But we have to remember that our Temple has a public character. Imagine having to negotiate with a Muslim or Jew and telling them that we consider their faith to be a part of the Christian Rite.

It would actually be more accurate to put it as \"The Abrahamic Rite\" since they are all Abrahamic religions. However, there is no need to make changes to these simply because of words. Semantics is not something which need be worried about.

The Abrahamic Rite! That`s a great idea Master Tom.

Twsoundsoff wrote:

But this is going to need some mind bending. Sounds like a fun task. Hmmmm.

Lol. I didn`t say I wasn`t going to make things easy.

nevertheless i think it is improtant to say once more, that just by another name for the rite it would not be the \"same\" anymore ... but I would like to have the rites a bigger denominator, being more universal than the present ones

i totally agree with \"Abrahamic Rite\"

Abrahamic Rite. How elegantly simple and beautifully put. I'm game for this concept.

Sekhu_Ba_Ra wrote:

Abrahamic Rite. How elegantly simple and beautifully put. I'm game for this concept.

I like that.

M

Abraham's case is interesting. A god provides a rehearsal to him. Examines his faith. Has to sacrifice for god his son.There is a parallel. God sacrifices his son for the man. He is sure that god did not want Izsak to die. He prevented this thing. Then why was asking this victim? What hat kind of seed does this thing have? I do not understand. God's road is inscrutable...

Eridanus wrote:

Abraham's case is interesting. A god provides a rehearsal to him. Examines his faith. Has to sacrifice for god his son.There is a parallel. God sacrifices his son for the man. He is sure that god did not want Izsak to die. He prevented this thing. Then why was asking this victim? What hat kind of seed does this thing have? I do not understand. God's road is inscrutable...

God certainly isn`t playing with anyone, I`m sure He could think of better than that. This was an experience for Abraham from which he could feel how important God is in his life.

\"If God is not of supreme importance then He is of no importance!\"

And what we have to remember is Abraham could have broken this off any time he wanted.

Very interesting topic, indeed.

Neaj Pa Bol wrote: \"Rules for the Forum\"


I have been sitting here, thinking of what \"Rules for the Forum\" means to me. I am one that likes things simplified and not so stricked you don't have breathing room to be human, so I will use and old phrase...
Keep it simple stupid...

1) This forum is open to all and any to post, read and maybe ponder in thought.

2) Posts should be of a positive nature, i.e.: pose a question, pose a thought, open discussion without bias.

3) THERE WILL BE NO BASHING OR ATTACKING POSTS OR MEMBERS OR MEMBERS BELIEFS OR CHOICES.

4) Topic is Christian Jedi, this is each persons own beliefs, understandings, thoughts, questions, etc., with polite and kind responses.

5) This forum is designed for members that follow a Christian standard in conjunction with Jediism.


I would expect that our members that come here will uphold good faith in posting. All members are welcome to join in. This is just a space for those who wish to have discussions and thoughts in their chosen path of Christianity inconjunction with Jediism.

Revision of these \"Rules for the Forum\" maybe updated as needed.

Thank you

8 years later I realized that not much was edited and the breakdown is incorrect. Abrahamic SIG has grown into not a Christian base but includes Judaic and Muslim as well, all derived from the Abrahamic line, so the rules are the same but covers a wider view of Religions. I will re-affirm the Rules later this week...