Religion Questions 31-40

THE QUESTION:
RE40: What is the religious/cultural significance of the temporary skin-painting done on the hands and arms of Indian women? I desire as detailed an answer as possible.

POSTED APRIL 30, 1998
L.A., 29, white female, Boston, MA

ANSWER 1:
Indian women, like many other Eastern women (Arabs, for example), consider the hand painting a sign of beauty and decoration. This is customarily done at times of weddings, engagements or other celebrations. It is a widespread cultural practice in the Eastern world not limited to Indian women.
POSTED JUNE 30, 1998
Ali S., 23, Indian <alis87@hotmail.com>, Los Angeles, CA
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE39: Why do people in some Asian cultures shave the heads of their babies on or around their first birthday? What is the cultural/religious significance? I desire as detailed an answer as possible.
POSTED APRIL 30, 1998
L.A., 29, white female, Boston, MA

ANSWER 1:
I am from Thailand, where this custom is still practiced widely. The hair is shaved more for hygienic reasons, as the climate in our country is very humid. The head is not completely shaved – usually a patch covering the crown is left. This is to protect the head, as the crown is still not fully formed in the child’s first year. In choosing a child’s hairstyle, parents will give a couple of clay dolls with differing hairstyles to the child (some with pigtails or topknot, or as many as three to four knots of hair). The child will choose one style for himself/herself.
POSTED JULY 23, 1998
K.P., Chinese-Thai, Bangkok

FURTHER NOTICE:
Vietnamese people believe they will grow thicker and nicer hair once it has been shaved. As a matter of fact, my wife is wanting to do this to our six-month-old twin boys.
POSTED DEC. 9, 1998
John, 28, Vietnamese <jvu@iex.com>, Dallas, TX
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE38: What is the religious/cultural significance of the dot on the forehead of Indian females? How do they get it there? Is it tatooed, painted or stick-on? What would happen if they neglected to put it on? I desire as detailed an answer as possible.
POSTED APRIL 30, 1998
L.A., 29, white female, Boston, MA
(Similar question posted Aug. 4, 1998, by Shelby M., Charlotte, NC)

ANSWER 1:
Traditionally, the dot on the forehead was a symbol of marriage. A woman, once married, has to wear the dot just like you wear a wedding ring. I think different communities have different traditions regarding which color should be used if you are not married or widowed. Today, that symbolism has largely vanished, and the dot is simply a beauty accoutrement for Indian girls and women, much like lipstick or eye-shadow. The dot can be put on in many ways: A liquid that washes off, a powder that will easily come off, or, most popular with the younger women and girls, stickers in a variety of colors and shapes. You stick it on, you can take ’em off and after a few times, the stickiness will be gone, so you throw it away and use a new one.
POSTED JULY 1, 1998
P.K.M., 29, Indian, Berkeley, CA

FURTHER NOTICE:
The “tika” mark worn by most adult Indian women on their forehead is usually made of a red vermilion paste, ash or sandalwood, and is not permanent. It can be applied by the woman to denote her Hindu sect (different colors), or can be applied by a priest as a blessing. Sometimes they are in the shape of three horizontal lines (followers of Shiva), and vertical lines (followers of Vishnu). On a man, the mark is known as a “Tilak.” The tika mark in the shape of a dot is known as a “bindi” and is worn to signify that a woman is married.
POSTED JULY 1, 1998
Martin J. <gshrzarmod@aol.com>, Salinas, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
This is not a symbol relegated only to Indian females, by the way. In a traditional Korean wedding ceremony, the bride has vermillion dots placed on the middle of her forehead, as well as her cheeks.
POSTED NOV. 9, 1998
Female Asian, New York, NY
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE37: Director’s Paraphrase: John L. of Calgary, Alberta, Canada, has asked a question related to reports of wife-burning by Hindu males. Specifically, he asks why this would done to a woman “just because she gave you daughters instead of sons? Both genders of children are equally deserving of love and to cherish, and I don’t understand how this type of blame can be placed on one spouse’s ability to produce one or the other gender.”
POSTED APRIL 30, 1998

ANSWER 1:
In most poorer, non-Western, highly agricultural societies, there is no such thing as retirement pensions or social security. Most people are extremely poor and the only security in old age is their children. In many of these cultures, women have no rights. They exist to marry and have children. They cannot go to school, work decent jobs or own property. Economically, a baby boy is the top prize, while a girl is just an unnecessary drain on the family’s resources. The cards are stacked even more against girls by simple physiology. Boys have higher mortality rates, which ups the ante considerably. And finally, if the government engages in a “population control” program, female genocide in general becomes quite widespread. In China, for instance, each couple gets one child, period. The result is forced abortion, infanticide, female circumcision (mutilating the female genitalia to make sex too painful to engage in), forced sterilization, etc. If the girl survives to adulthood, she marries and becomes the property of the husband. If she does not deliver the goods, it’s his legal perogative to abandon her, divorce her or have her killed. Religion is usually part of the undergirding social structure and can contribute to the situation, but it’s usually not the prime motivation.
POSTED MAY 7, 1998
Peter P., Roman Catholic, Redford, MI

FURTHER NOTICE:
I am not sure exactly what this question is referring to: The Hindu “custom” of sati, wherein a wife commits suicide (on his funeral pyre) when the husband dies, or some report of a wife being burned by an angry husband? If the latter, it is a deplorable case of wife abuse, a human-rights violation, murder, etc. We shouldn’t try to find cultural reasons or justifications for it, such as the response above, by lumping all sorts of non-Western “traditions” together. For example, female circumcision is practiced in some countries in Africa. This has nothing to do with China’s “one child” policy, which in turn has little to do with India, since India is neither an African country nor has a one child policy. If the question is regarding sati, then it would be useful to realize that this practice has never been a universally accepted Hindu custom by any stretch. It is thought to have been common many centuries ago, with a particular group of people in a particular region of India, and there are sound explanations for why it came to be even there. But it is not something the majoriity of Hindus have ever practiced, and it is certainly condemned today by 99.9 percent of practicing Hindus.
POSTED JULY 1, 1998
P.K.M., 29, Indian, Berkeley, CA
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE36: Adam and Eve had to have mated with their children, or their children had to have mated with each other. Doesn’t the Bible say incest is wrong? Isn’t incest how things had to have been started?
POSTED APRIL 30, 1998
M. Simon, Port Huron, MI

ANSWER 1:
Starting from a population of two (Eden) or eight (post-flood), there will have to be marriage between close relatives. You will not find any commandment against incest until Moses led the Jews out of Egypt. By that time, all cultures had sufficient population to support themselves genetically. Incest only seems to have become genetically dangerous after the flood, if you look at the life spans given in the Bible.
POSTED MAY 26, 1998
C. Pepmiller, 40, Christian <craig@more.net>, MO

FURTHER NOTICE:
If one believes the myth of Adam and Eve, then you are 100 percent correct. St. Augustine certainly believed it, noting that antipodes (people on the other side of the Earth) could not exist because there was no way the original two people could have produced them. I believe many now consider the story an allegory, not of two people, but creation of the world and all people. But I could be wrong.
POSTED MAY 26, 1998
Ed H., 56, white male, history student <EdHam@aol.com>, Silver Springs, FL
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE35: I grew up baptized as Protestant, but received virtually no religious training, though we observed Christmas and I know a little about that holiday. My question: How do Christians feel about the Bible? It strikes me as such a huge book to get to know, and I wonder how people use it for guidance. Do you study it over and over even when your life is busy? Or did you study it just as a kid? I especially want to know how people distinguish between the things to take literally and those figuratively. It would also be helpful for answerers to say if they consider themselves to be devout, lightly practicing or non-practicing.
POSTED APRIL 29, 1998
N.P., 35, African-American male
Philadelphia, PA

ANSWER 1:
I am a devout Methodist and have studied the Bible always, but far more as an adult than as a child. While it is helpful to be familiar with the language and concepts from an early age, the Bible is not a children’s book. Much of my Bible study during very busy times in my life was simply showing up at services and hearing the Bible read there. “Lectionary” churches read specified passages each Sunday of the year. Each Sunday, millions of Christians in different denominations worldwide listen to exactly the same passages. I would imagine you can also find an adult Bible study group through a church in your community. There is a fine book recently published specifically for people who don’t feel comfortable reading the Bible: The Good Book by Peter J. Gomes, who is also an African American raised as a Protestant. He addresses many of the highly controversial aspects of the Bible and explains major disagreements that arise among sincere Bible-believing Christians.
POSTED MAY 6, 1998
Chris G., <caguldi@flash.net>, Dallas, TX

FURTHER NOTICE:
As a not-as-devout-as-I-want-to-be Catholic, the Bible is the basis for Christianity and just a great read in general. It seems like a ponderous tome, but the basic message of the whole book is summed up in John 3:16: “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son to die for us, that whosoever believes in Him shall have eternal life” (Now you know what those signs at football games mean). A great deal of the book is action narrative that tells this story using a number of surprisingly flawed characters. Most people are surprised to find that the book of Genesis has more illicit sexual encounters than a good episode of “Melrose Place.” The rest of the book fills out this idea and what it means to us today through poetry, theological discourse and a number of other literary approaches. As to how you decide what is literal and what is figurative, that is what theologians do based on context, archeaology, varied critical methods, Jewish and early Christian tradition, etc. Even the study of the history of scriptural interpretation is quite interesting, and Catholics entrust the decision of what is “proper interpretation” to the authority of the Church, while Protestants do not. However, no matter how you slice it, the basic message is clear, and there is no ambiguity.
POSTED MAY 7, 1998
Peter P., Roman Catholic <PPROUT20@aol.com>, Redford, MI

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
It’s sad to say, but most religious people have never read through the core writings for their faith. I suspect a great deal of hardship would be eliminated if everyone did their reading. I decided a few years ago to read through the Bible. I bought a “One Year Bible” and, after some fitful starts, I’m nearly done. I plan to continue until I get tired of the one-year format and then change to some other organized plan. I know someone who decided to read “Think and Grow Rich” each year. He read, then started to practice … and is now a millionaire at 40. He is also divorced and living in a wealth-conserving shack. I decided the Bible would encourage a far more balanced life. If you are interested in Christianity, read the basics. It’s taking me about 40 minutes a day, and I consider it well worth it.
POSTED MAY 23, 1998
C. Pepmiller, 40, Christian <craig@more.net>, Missouri

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
I have found that simply reading the Scriptures for 10 minutes a day, every day, right before I go to sleep, helps a lot. Of course, you can pick a different time, like five, 15, 20 or something else. I also like to memorize Scriptures I like or that have a special meaning to me. You can start at Genesis and work your way through, or read a certain section, like the Beatitudes or the Book of Isaiah, if you feel that particular part of the Bible could help you in your life at the time. Scripture study classes also help immensely.
POSTED JUNE 15, 1998
Rachel J., 14, Christian <fredjudd@aol.com>, Irvine, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 4:
Sometimes, in times of trouble and desperation, I will grab my Bible and randomly open it to a page and read the first paragraph I see. Amazingly, what I have read often has significance to my problem, and these instances occur more than can be explained by probability. However, I must admit that most often I open the book near the middle (not consciously) where the books of Psalms and Proverbs are located. These can be considered the “advice” section of the Bible, in that they offer simple instructions on a wide variety of problems.
POSTED AUG. 31, 1998
J.C. <JPPC3@aol.com>, Naperville, IL
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE34: Many customs associated with holidays have their origins in pagan holidays and beliefs. Why do non-pagans seem to readily incorporate some pre-Christian customs (the Easter bunny, Easter eggs, Christmas trees, Yule logs, wassailing, Candlemas, Jack-o-Lanterns, trick-or-treating, May baskets, May poles, wheat weaving, corn dollies, etc.) while other pagan customs often engender fear or strong opposition (Goddess, pentagrams, tarot cards, balefires, chanting, covens, circle casting, dumb supper, sabbats, etc.)? I do not see this fear associated as much with the more unfamiliar customs of other minority religions in the United States. (Hindu, Shinto, Buddhist, etc.) as with Wicca and Voudou (proper for “Voodoo”).
POSTED APRIL 28, 1998
WitchWomon, Dianic witch <WitchWomon@aol.com>, Southfield, MI

ANSWER 1:
I agree with you that Christians celebrating non-Christian festivals does seem weird, especially if they are so anti-Paganism. I think a lot of it stems from not knowing the origins of these festivals or refusing to believe the truth about them (my grandparents, for example). However, I can see a big difference between the first list of Pagan “accepted” traditions and most of the second list of “non-accepted” traditions. The accepted traditions are more to do with charms protecting yourself from evil, whereas the second list includes practices that are supposed to be able to cause things to happen – for either good or bad. I do have friends who are strict Christians and they don’t celebrate Halloween, but I think they still celebrate Easter with eggs and rabbits!
POSTED APRIL 29, 1998
Beth, Edinburgh, UK

FURTHER NOTICE:
To WitchWomon: As a seminary student 20 years ago, I had the same questions. Then I found a book titled “Babylon Mystery Religion.” It changed my whole outlook, beliefs and method of study concerning the Bible and modern traditions. As a result, I do not celebrate accepted modern “Christian” holidays.

Here is my reasoning: The Bible was written by Jews, living in Jewish communities, following Jewish customs and traditions. When I applied this line of thinking to my study of the Scripture, it changed my whole understanding of what was written down. Until the rule of Constantine the Roman emperor, early Christians followed Judaisam with the understanding that the Messiah had indeed come for their “atonement.” Constantine made Christianity a state religion, but with his own traditions. Anyone found following Jewish traditions was killed. So early Christians found ways to identify their beliefs with pagan, e.g. Passover was switched for Easter.

My opinion is that they fully intended to go back to their original ways of worship when Constantine died, but as we see today, that never happened. Now, modern Christians so thoroughly identify with these holidays that it is nearly impossible to change. Coupled with the fact that we have so many fond memories of these holidays as children, to change would be painful, almost a betrayal to their families. I have a question for you: I was a little surprised to see that you (a proclaimed witch) identified non-pagans with Christians and non-Christians with pagans. Can you explain?
POSTED APRIL 30, 1998
Steve N., 40 <blaster7@hotmail.com.>, Dallas

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I believe the answer to your question is stated in your question: The numerous holiday-related events/symbols aren’t frightening because they have been “borrowed” into Christianity as a means of converting pagan peoples into Christianity. Other symbols – pentagrams, goddess, etc .- were both not assimilated into Christianity and were vehemently propagandized against in an effort to squelch “witchcraft” (Wiccan or otherwise). Buddhism, Hinduism, etc. were never serious opponents to then-new Christianity because of their distance from the European center, broadly defined.
POSTED APRIL 30, 1998
Lilstar, Wiccan male, Huntington, WV

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
I suspect it has nothing to do with the origin of the practice(s) and everything to do with marketing and the media. I lived in Japan for three years, where a majority of people follow the Buddhist or Shinto religions. Christmas is very big there – decorations and music and gift-giving, etc. (The life-sized statues of Col. Sanders outside the KFCs get dressed up as Santa). I don’t know how this got started, but it is obviously not in a religious (e.g., Christian) context.
POSTED APRIL 30, 1998
D.M.S., female, 30, Jacksonville, FL

FURTHER NOTICE 4:
I am a Christian and well aware of the pagan origins of the aforementioned holiday symbols. I couldn’t care less about it because it is simply fun to celebrate in those fashions. My children get Easter baskets, go trick-or-treating and receive Christmas presents. So what?
POSTED APRIL 30, 1998
J.R. <exwob@aol.com>, Riverview, MI

FURTHER NOTICE 5:
I am a Christian. You have included some things in your question that you have called pagan celebrations, such as Christmas presents and Easter eggs. The tradition of Christmas presents came about because of the gifts brought to our Lord on his birth, and Easter eggs were given as a representation of “New Life” after his resurrection. I do not let my child celebrate other pagan holidays such as Halloween. This is a holiday that celebrates evil and demonic things.
POSTED MAY 3, 1998
M. Mauldin, 27, Christian white female, Birmingham, AL

FURTHER NOTICE 6:
To Steve N.: I’m not sure how you inferred your question from what I posted, since I did not imply what you are inferring. While Christians are non-pagan and pagans are non-Christian, there are many who are neither Christian nor pagan (Jewish, Muslim, agnostic, atheist, etc.). Besides Christians, many people who consider themselves neither Christian nor pagan still celebrate the holiday customs mentioned, which is fine with me.

I just wish some people were no more fearful of and more respectful toward other Wiccan practices as they seem to be of the religious practices of other religions. It is not logical that the concept of Goddess should be more disdainful than that of God, or that Wiccan chanting should be any more fear-inducing than Buddhist chanting, or that a coven sabbat should be any more frightening than a Shinto ritual. Some folks who would never dream of picketing a mosque or synagogue seem to have no conpunction at all about opposing a Beltane or Samhain ritual. How best to overcome that fear is the question. Hopefully, this Y? Forum will help.
POSTED MAY 3, 1998
WitchWomon, Dianic witch <WitchWomon@aol.com>, Southfield, MI

FURTHER NOTICE 7:
I feel pagan holidays and pagan ways have been given a bad rap through the ages. All you ever hear about witchcraft is tied up in Satanism and evil, which is kind of funny because I have never heard of a wiccan or pagan group that believes in Satan. Although pagan holidays were apparently combined with the Christian religion to make the transformation over to Christian ways easier, some of the pagan gods were used as the new Christian devils.
POSTED MAY 3, 1998
Dave O., Hazel Park, MI

FURTHER NOTICE 8:
The origins of a festival or date are irrelevant. In modern Christianity, a festival is a symbol or landmark of an important event: That is its only importance. OK, the selection of the date might, hidden by the mists of time, be pagan. However, it is celebrated as a Christian ceremony, and that is what people who observe it are focusing on. The symbols of a festival are a bit funnier. If Bible Belt Christians were halfway aware that they adorn their houses with pagan fertility symbols at Easter, I guess you’d sell fewer Easter bunnies in Texas. But bunnies and chicks are cuddly. Halloween demons are not.
POSTED MAY 4, 1998
Trailer <trailer99@hotmail.com>, Chatham, UK

FURTHER NOTICE 9:
To M. Mauldin (Further Notice 5): The practice of leaving gifts under the Christmas tree originated from the Norse custom of leaving gifts for Odin under the tallest tree in the forest at the winter solstice.

Easter is named after the old goddess of fertility, Oestre. The origin of Easter eggs and bunnies was this: After a long winter, Oestre was walking through the woods when she heard the first bird of spring singing. She rewarded the bird by giving it the form of a rabbit. The bird was so happy with its new shape that she laid a nest of brightly colored eggs as a gift for Oestre.

The pagans refused to give up their holidays and traditions when Christianity forbade them, so the early Christian church co-opted the holidays in an attempt to convert more people.
POSTED MAY 9, 1998
Colette <inkwolf@earthlink.net>, Seymour, WI

FURTHER NOTICE 10:
Dear WitchWomon: First, my apology. I did not understand your usage of “pagan/non-pagan.” As to Wiccan practice and beliefs, I am the first to say that I am ignorant of them. To many people raised in traditional churches, the word “witch” automatically instills a certain level of fear, mistrust and/or misunderstanding. As to Goddess/God, I have no problem with it. In my belief system, there are times I need the mothering aspect of God, and there are times I need the fathering aspect. To me, the word “God” is not a gender-based word. In the Bible we read that both genders were created in the image of God. Therefore, God must embody both genders. Further, in the New Testament, even Jesus compares God to a mother hen gathering her chicks for protection. In a male-dominated society, we tend to overlook such details. I would like more dialogue on Wiccan beliefs. I have a feeling I might not agree with some practice issues, but there may be common ground in some of the thoughts and beliefs behind the practices themselves. Thank you for responding.
POSTED MAY 15, 1998
Steve N., 40 <blaster7@hotmail.com>, Dallas, TX

FURTHER NOTICE 11:
Any ritual or holiday exists only if it is meaningful to the participant. For instance, my child’s birthday is cause for great celebration in my house, but probably means nothing to you. We may even have a ritual dinner at a particular restaurant because it means something to us, even though you and I might agree there are much better places to eat. Christianity began as a sect of Judaism. It existed initially in the Roman Empire, which was at the time a religious smorgasbord. Following Christ’s teachings to “render unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar’s,” they would typically take part in the social life of the area in which they lived. Local custom and varied religious celebrations were given Christian significance and incorporated into religious life as long as they didn’t violate fundamental tenets (i.e. no child sacrifices, no denying the faith, etc.). These practices eventually became traditions. The needle now swings the other way. Christmas is a secular orgy of materialism yet maintains its significance in the Church as a celebration of Christ’s birth. Other religious traditions (voodoo, etc.) would probably be incorporated elsewhere if someone else found some significance in them. Of course, they would then lose their “real” intention.
POSTED MAY 20, 1998
Peter P., Roman Catholic <PPROUT20@aol.com>, Redford, MI

FURTHER NOTICE 12:
As a Jehovah’s Witness, this is the reason we do not celebrate holidays. The only thing Jesus specifically instructed us to observe yearly was the “Last Supper” or the “Memorial of Jesus’ Death.” This is not exactly a “celebration” because it is such a serious occasion, but it does remind us of the importance of his death and what it makes possible for mankind. Neither Jesus nor the early Christians observed customs that had Pagan origins. I do not view the first list any differently from your second list – all are associated with false worship. As for those who say, “I don’t care about the origin, no one remembers that anyway,” I ask, “Doesn’t your God remember?” He certainly knows what all these observances mean. Christians would never think of keeping Jewish customs, so why should they keep Pagan ones?
POSTED JULY 27, 1998
M.A.M., 25, Atlanta, GA
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE33: I was taught God was all-forgiving. If this is so, how can some religions say that only people who believe in and practice their faith will go to heaven? Won’t anyone who believes in God go to heaven?
POSTED APRIL 20, 1998
Jessica C., 27, white female, Summerville, S.C.

ANSWER 1:
In traditional evangelical Christianity, it is not considered enough to simply believe in the existence of God. Satan believes in the existence of God. One must trust and know God as well, which means accepting Christ as your savior in your heart, and praying and reading the Bible. If one truly believes in God as He really is, as revealed in scripture, then one knows that God cannot tolerate sin, because sin and holiness cannot exist together. We must admit our sin (confess) and accept His forgiveness. If this isn’t necessary, then God sent His son to die for nothing. I don’t think He would bother.
POSTED APRIL 23, 1998
Terry A., white female, evangelical Christian <MrsArthur1@aol.com>
Sterling Heights, MI

FURTHER NOTICE:
The Bible states that you have to be baptized in Christ in order to be saved from sin. So, it is not enough to just believe in a greater power.
POSTED APRIL 23, 1998
Aaron S., Jackson, MS

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I believe God is all-forgiving if you repent of your sins. By repenting, you are saying you are sorry for your sins and will try your hardest not to sin anymore. You must believe in God in order to say you are sorry for sinning against him. To say that to go to heaven you must believe in Him is true. If you believe in him, you will listen to his commandments. Thus, you will honor his command to honor him through church. I don’t think it really matters which church you go to, as long as it is Christian.
POSTED APRIL 23, 1998
M.L.H., 31, Lutheran <mlhutchi@oakland.edu>
Novi, MI

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
The idea of forgiveness means that something was wrong and needed to be forgiven. Different faiths have different ways for making up for this need for forgiveness. Imagine a good friend clearly wronged you. Then she started to be very nice to you, but never apologized. Have you ever had the feeling, “I just would like to hear ‘I’m sorry.’?” I believe God doesn’t want us to try to please him so much that he will forget we wronged him, but rather just to admit that we did and ask for forgiveness. Many faiths will try to compensate with good deeds to try to make up for bad ones; others say you can’t earn it, but that God graciously forgives if you ask him. It is on this idea of how to reconcile with God that the faiths disagree. Logically speaking, people of different faiths will say if you are trying to reconcile with God the wrong way, then perhaps you are not forgiven.
POSTED APRIL 23, 1998
J. Batton <jbatton@ibm.net>, Dallas, Texas

FURTHER NOTICE 4:
Different religions teach different things about the nature of God, sin, forgiveness, etc. Most require fidelity to the teachings of the faith or they don’t believe in a “god” that could be sinned against. In either case, forgiveness is not a big part of the religious views. You probably got your views of forgiveness from Christianity, where it is fundamental to the religion. Christianity believes in a personal God, that sin severs our proper relationship with God and that, through the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, God offers to restore that relationship by the complete forgiveness of sins. But even here, forgiveness is not unconditional. You must recognize your sins and make a committed attempt to amend your ways (formally called repentance) before you are forgiven.
POSTED APRIL 23, 1998
Peter P., Roman Catholic <PPROUT20@aol.com>
Redford, MI

FURTHER NOTICE 5:
It is true that God is all-forgiving. There are many religions that claim their way is the only way. So how do you know which one is the true way? The Bible is the best source to answer your question. In it, you will discover that Jesus said He is the Way, the Truth and the Life. Many men since have made similar claims, but they have fallen short. Sure, they may have had or have a following of people, but they do not claim they sacrificed their life in order to make mankind clean and forgive our sins.
POSTED APRIL 24, 1998
Guardian95, 28, African-American male <guardian95@aol.com>
Lexington, KY

FURTHER NOTICE 6:
I can’t explain the contradiction in your religious teachings, but I can tell you that the concepts of “heaven” and “hell” are not universal. Not all religions include the belief in the existence of “heaven” and “hell”
Marsha Z. <mzalik@telusplanet.net>
Grande Prairie, Alberta, Canada

FURTHER NOTICE 7:
I think the ability to recognize truth is in all of us. When we hear it, see it or whatever way it is revealed to us, we will recognize it and know it to be. Therefore, search yourself for the answer to this question, read, ask others if you deem it necessary, but by no means take those resources as the gospel truth. Books were written by man, and all messages have of way of losing a little of their true meaning everytime they are passed down. But don’t take my word for it, examine it for yourself. Another thing: Man has always found a way to to manipulate a scripture to get his point of view across. So trust that voice inside of you, talk to your God and you will find your way.
POSTED APRIL 26, 1998
Sabrina M <samal31@yahoo.com>, Georgia

FURTHER NOTICE 8:
Despite their widespread acceptance and practice in human culture, the basic premise of there being such things as a God, a Heaven and even an afterlife are questions that remain devoid of factual support in the real world. Furthermore, to quote John Fowles on the matter: The true longing of humanity is not for an afterlife. It is for the establishment of a justice here and now which will make an afterlife unnecessary. As to why some religious groups lay claim to owning the only “keys to the kingdom,” the answer is quite simple: Any religious group making such a claim is seeking to: 1) Increase its numbers through fear, and 2) Provide comfort, security and stability to those who already believe by maintaining the quite possibly erroneous viewpoint that “we are the only ones who are right.”
POSTED MAY 3, 1998
R.M., Brandon, FL

FURTHER NOTICE 9:
I do not believe God is all-forgiving. I believe He forgives only when we sincerely ask for forgiveness. We don’t get forgiven simply because we need forgiving; we get forgiven because we realize we have done wrong and are truly repentant.That means turning away from the wrong thing we did and making a life change regarding that particular “wrong.” Regarding going to heaven: When in the Garden of Gethsemane the night before His crucifixion, Jesus, while praying, said (my paraphrase): “If there’s any other way for the world to be forgiven Lord, this is the time to let me in on it.” By the lack of a response, another way, Jesus knew for sure that there was no other way to get to heaven except by the way He provided by giving His life for anyoned who accepts it. It takes faith, but I believe accepting the Bible takes a lot less faith than some of the things my atheist acquaintances believe in. Taking that first step of faith is truly a big one, but it’s the first one. Once you trust and believe, the rest just gets easier. It’s a building block kind of thing. With each step of your walk with the Lord, your faith increases and you are able to understand so much more. Then you wonder why you ever doubted.
POSTED JUNE 14, 1998
Dottie M., 43, Southern Baptist <agr8grny@exis.net>, Yorktown, VA

FURTHER NOTICE 10:
Although I am not responding directly to your question, it and the other responses brought this question to mind: Does anyone else question the idea of a deity that creates a son solely for the purpose of being murdered for someone else’s sins? When the story of that family that had a baby solely for the purpose of using her as a donor for her older sister came out, people were shocked. These are the same people who accept the aforementioned idea of sacrifice? It sends chills up and down my spine.
POSTED FEB. 12, 1999
Sidna, born-again pagan/Wiccan <baskthed@flash.net>, Fort Worth, TX
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE32: Do Jewish people consider themselves white or minority?
POSTED APRIL 14, 1998
Colette <inkwolf@earthlink.net>
Seymour, WI

ANSWER 1:
I consider myself white, as do all Jewish people I know (except for certain Jews of African origin and certain African-American converts). I find it hard to imagine what other classification related to skin color I would be. Perhaps you are wondering whether Jews are a separate race. That question has been debated forever. My own opinion, as a biologist, is that it is a meaningless question, much like whether Slavs or Anglo-Saxons are a separate race. When I was born in 1942, I was a minority in terms of how Jewish people were treated in relationship to jobs, home-buying and college admissions. In my opinion, such quotas are no longer a live issue, and I do not consider myself a member of a minority group.
POSTED APRIL 16, 1998
Mark D., 55, Jewish by birth, Boulder, CO

FURTHER NOTICE:
All the Jews I know consider themselves white. I was told this derives from German Jews in the 1800s, who declared themselves to be “Americans of the Jewish religion” – and thought of themselves as, basically, Christless Christians. Given that they are physically unidentifiable as Jews (unless they wear skullcaps or such) they have come to think of themselves as part of the majority – not a minority. A non-Jewish friend of mine who is still in high school told me that Jews are the only ethnic group that does not segregate themselves in lunch, as do Chaldeans, Indians, Pakistanis, Asians, blacks, etc. He says that Jews and non-Jewish whites sit together and think nothing of it, which I suppose is the most persuasive evidence that they think of themselves as white.
POSTED APRIL 18, 1998
M.D., Jewish, Detroit, MI

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I think you’re (the original questioner) confusing race and religion. Most Jews in North America are descended from European immigrants. I, and most others, consider myself white. But there are also black Jews and Asian Jews who likely would consider themselves of a different race. On the other hand, I also consider myself a member of a minority, but a minority religious group. Just because there’s no “Jew” field on a government census form doesn’t mean I don’t feel different from the majority.
POSTED APRIL 18, 1998
Lawrence, 31, Jewish male
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE31: In general, what is the difference between a Moslem and a Muslim? Or is there a difference, other than spelling?
POSTED APRIL 14, 1998
Apryl P., black <apryl@mail-me.com>
Oak Park, MI

ANSWER 1:
The message of Islam was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad in Arabic, the language he spoke and understood. The Quran (Islam’s holy book) exists in the original Arabic as revealed more than 1,400 years ago. Most terms relating to this faith are Arabic terms. There are certain letters of the Arabic alphabet that do not have a perfect equivalent in the English alphabet, hence phonetic spellings. Of the two spellings, the preferred is “Muslim” (meaning “one who submits to Allah”). The pronunciation of this spelling most closely matches the Arabic word that identifies a follower of Islam. The spelling and pronunciation “Moslem” is considered archaic and derogatory.
POSTED APRIL 18, 1998
F. Talib, Muslim
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada