Religion Questions 81-90

THE QUESTION:
RE90: My understanding is that it is quite difficult to convert to Judaism. Why is this?
POSTED AUG. 12, 1998
Mireille, 26 <mireille2000@hotmail.com>, Washington, DC

ANSWER 1:
I don’t think it is difficult to convert to Judaism. It will require some degree of study and thought. I’ve heard that the teachers are supposed to discourage the student from conversion. This is supposed to challenge the student’s reasons for converting and also to ensure the student is doing it freely. In fact, the politically correct description for a convert is Jew By Choice. In any event, these Jews By Choice are often more educated in ritual and practice than other Jews.
POSTED AUG. 24, 1998
Mark, Jewish guy, San Francisco Bay Area, CA

FURTHER NOTICE:
My husband is just completing his conversion, and it is difficult. He has to learn a lot and answer a lot of questions about what he has learned, why he wants to be a Jew and about his sincerity. Then he has to be ritually circumcised (just a drop of blood, since he was circumcised as an infant, but still…) and he must go to the ritual bath. I tell him that it is much like citizenship. We accept everyone who is born on American soil is a citizen – but if someone is born abroad and wants to become a citizen, the United States rightly wants to know a thing or two about them and checks to be sure they have learned enough about America (civics and language tests), and that they sincerely want to give up their ole citizenship and become Americans (loyalty oath). But once you are a Jew, you are a Jew forever and in every way, and we welcome the fresh insights and energy that “Jews By Choice” bring to a very old tribe. We hope and trust that it is worth the effort.
POSTED AUG. 27, 1998
Naomi B., 43, Jewish <benari-r@worldnet.att.com>, Jacksonville, FL

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
There’s an additional difference between converting to Judaism and converting to Christianity: Christians believe that a person must be a Christian in order to “be saved” and have a right relationship with G-d. Jews don’t have the same concept; there is no Jewish belief that non-Jews are damned. In other words, Jews don’t feel that helping people to convert to Judaism will automatically confer great benefits on the new converts.
POSTED MARCH 10, 1999
Robin, 35, Jew, Bluefield , WV
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE89: As a child, my mother took me to Sunday School every week and exposed me to all the rituals of the church. Since then, I have had doubts and become more skeptical each year. Why do people in a modern, sophisticated world cling to ancient superstitions and beliefs in the name of their religion?
POSTED AUG. 10, 1998
Fred C., Corvallis, OR

ANSWER 1:
It can be because the world is a big scary place, and we are small. Involvement in a religion makes you feel you are part of something bigger than yourself, both in terms of whatever connection to deity it promises you and that you are part of an institution that was there before you and probably will outlive you. It can be because religions are human expressions of beauty. It can be an identity issue – part of who we know ourselves to be is defined by our religion. It can be an attempt to impose order on or at least reach some sort of understanding with those parts of our lives that seem to be immune to reason.
POSTED SEPT. 19, 1998
Catherine 25, Witch <tylik@eskimo.com>, Woodinville, WA

FURTHER NOTICE:
I’m 44, have a master’s degree in social work and have seen a lot of pain and suffering in my life, overseas while in the military and later on as a family counselor. My religious faith has been a source of guidance, in a way. It has helped me respond to people with whom I’ve come in contact in a compassionate way. I’ve heard people talk about religion as superstition before, and I know that religion can be misused, exploited and twisted. But, that’s not how religion has been in my life. It has provided me with a role model (in my case, Jesus) and a value system that has helped me respond with empathy and has moved me to try and help people of many backgrounds, beliefs, races, creeds, etc.
POSTED FEB. 18, 1999
Bill, 44, male <ndu75@airmail.net>, San Angelo, TX
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE88: I had a boyfriend who was Christian, and when I made food, he would look up and thank God before thanking me. Is this considered extreme or normal behavior for religious people?
POSTED AUG. 9, 1998
Marcie B., 29, white Jewish American, Boston , MA

ANSWER 1:
As a Christian I can share with you my perspective. Thanking God for the gift of food or anything is considered appropriate, for all things flow from God. Thanking God should not mean that your boyfriend cannot thank you for preparing the meal. Side note: If your boyfriend thanks God for a meal, he probably thanks God for you. I know I thank the Lord for my wife. You may want to thank God for your meal along with your boyfriend next time. The God of Abraham is the God of the Jews, Islam and the Christians. Emphasis should be placed on the connections and not the disconnections between people of faith.
POSTED AUG. 18, 1998
Jean , 39, male <jgagnier@efortress.com>, Westerly, RI

FURTHER NOTICE:
An action is only extreme to those who are either offended by or ignorant of the action. I do not know if you are a Christian, but if you are, then you would agree that you alongside of him would thank God first and foremost for the blessings given to you. On the other hand, if you are not a Christian or have no knowledge of Christianity, then how can you know what is either extreme or not extreme? For example, in other countries it is extreme to accept millions from winning the lottery – do you want to be judged by such ignorant individuals? If the Bible is true, the meaning of “extreme” is void of use when used to characterize what a human does to thank God.
POSTED SEPT. 9, 1998
Sord, 32, male, Los Angeles, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
Marcia: I’m sure the previous two respondents meant well with their answers, but I don’t feel they give you credit for asking a question in good faith about something you’re not familiar with. I recognize that you do not have to agree with someone’s personal values to desire to understand them. I also don’t think you should consider being part of the ritual if you don’t want to. Personally, I think it was rude for the boyfriend to not thank you for preparing the meal. Girl, he should have sent you roses! I was raised in a Southern Methodist home. We thanked God for every meal and gave mom a hug and kiss for preparing it.
POSTED NOV. 23, 1998
Alma, lesbian who still says grace <pridewks@seacove.net>, Kempner, Tx
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE87: As the son of a Jewish mom, I experienced a lot of guilt growing up. From what I’ve heard and read, making their sons or daughters feel guilty seems to be characteristic of Jewish moms. If this is so, why is it? I would like to understand this better so I could better understand the way I am today, and some choices I’ve made.
POSTED AUG. 9, 1998
A.K., 40, Jewish male, Sitka , Alaska

ANSWER 1:
I think “guilt” has gotten a bad rap in the Twentieth Century. Millions of people spend a fortune going to psychotherapists, trying to lose the feelings of guilt their parents and churches/synagogues instilled in them. But on the whole, guilt is a healthy thing. The best definition of guilt is “The disturbing feeling that I’m not as good a person as I should be.” And that feeling is essential if we’re ever to be good people. The most sick and evil people in this world are the ones who are incapable of feeling guilt. If you’re faithful to your spouse because you’d feel awful if you hurt her, that’s good! If you give generously to charity because you’d feel awful if children starved and you’d done nothing, that’s good! If you refrain from hurting others because you’d feel guilty afterward, that’s good! So, don’t knock guilt. Sometimes, that little nagging voice your mother (or priest or rabbi) put in your head is just what it takes to make you a better person.
POSTED SEPT. 1, 1998
Astorian, 37, Catholic male <Astorian@aol.com>, Austin, TX

FURTHER NOTICE:
What’s a nice Jewish boy like you doing in Alaska? That would no doubt cause anguish for your mother. I say this in good humor; I had a (now dead) relative through marriage who was a rabbi in Alaska. I know from Irish Catholic friends that this group is often no better or worse when it comes to guilt trips. But look at what a nice person you turned out to be! And your people (the Jews) have survied as long as the Chinese as a people; therefore, something mothers are doing must be OK, right?
POSTED NOV. 19, 1998
Fred, Jewish, 69, married, mother gone but missed <flap@mindspring.com>, CT

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
As the son of a non-Jewish mother, I can tell you that guilt trips are hardly relegated to your mother and members of your religious/cultural background. This is said in all due respect to my mother, whom I love more than anything in the world. I get the impression that guilt is a popular behavioral control utilized by mothers to their sons that transcends religious belief.
POSTED JAN. 18, 1999
David, 19, with a Catholic mother, Philadelphia, PA
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE86: Every time I see a woman in traditional Islamic dress, I wonder why female genital circumcision is practiced in some cultures. What purpose could it serve? Do many Muslim sects condone this practice? What do Muslims in America think of it?
POSTED AUG. 6, 1998
Jonathan A. <jdames@intrex.net>, Raleigh, NC

ANSWER 1:
It seems to me that the ideas that lie behind genital mutilation are not very different from American ideas about circumcision. Certainly, the degree of mutilation is far more severe and life threatening, but the ideas behind some of it, at least in the Sudan, are concepts of purity, what is desirable and pleasing to the husband and what is deemed appropriate for marriage. Women who do not go through this ordeal in many areas are generally not desired for marriage. This is often seen as unacceptable. I think the main reason for the practice is to enhance the man’s pleasure. The removal of the clitoris, inner and outer labia and stitching up of the vagina desensitize the woman and make it tighter for the man. We have similar ideas behind our practice of male circumcision (health), the stitching up of the vagina (men’s pleasure) and the removal of the clitoral hood (women’s pleasure). Pharonic circumcision (the removal of the two sides of the vulva), though, is a much more dangerous practice, causing life-threatening circumstances at times of menstruation, urination, intercourse and pregnancy. As for people who come to the United States, many retain their cultural values and continue to practice it. Like the issue of the veil, women are often the staunchest supporters of the practice.
POSTED AUG. 18, 1998
Jaimie W., 23, female, anthropology major, Jacksonville, FL

FURTHER NOTICE:
To Jaimie: I don’t think the tightness created, and suggested male pleasure derived, is a major factor in the practice of female circumcision. It is more to do with the other point that you mention, the prevention of female sexual pleasure. The whole point is to prevent women from seeking sexual gratification from outside their marriage. At least that is the impression I have gotten from talking to people of Islamic Arabic cultures. Male circumcision has evolved for completely different reasons. It has a strictly health-related function. In arid, desert environments, a foreskin can cause problems. I don’t think I need to explain this in detail, but dirt granules can get into the wrong places and literally cause friction!
POSTED AUG. 20, 1998
K.B., reproductive scientist, Durham, Great Britain

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I think it is very important to understand, at least from what I think I’ve learned, that the practice of female circumcision is a cultural phenomenon that is distinct, separate and independent of Islam as a religion. In other words, my understanding is that female circumcision reflects the culture of the Middle East and Africa, and does not reflect Islam per se (note that the practice also happens among some non-Arab and/or non-Muslim African cultures as well). I may be wrong, but I’m almost certain the custom predates Islam as well. I have never heard of the custom outside the aforementioned regions, such as in the Indian subcontinent or Southeast Asians, where many (in fact the vast majority of) Muslims live. Relatedly, it’s important to remember that not all Muslims are Arab and not all Arabs are Muslim. If you see a woman wearing traditional Islamic clothing, you can’t assume they are Arab. And you should certainly not associate such a woman or the image of such a woman with female circumcision. While there is some overlap of Muslims and Arabs practicing female circumcision, the custom must be separated and put in its proper cultural context.
POSTED NOV. 19, 1998
Mihir, Indian/Jain, 25 <mishah@vt.edu>, Skokie, IL

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
As U.S. Peace Corps volunteers in Ethiopia, we found that 13 of the 14 provinces practiced the ritual of clitoridectomy. The only province that did not was Gojam province. When we asked our instructors why, we were told simply that the practice ensured the fidelity of the female. The belief was that the less pleasure felt, the less chance that a woman would seek sex with a man other than her husband. When I later traveled to Kenya, I found that clitoridectomies were no longer practiced there. I was told that this was due to British influence, because their colonists were “appalled” by the practice. As Americans, we seemed to be more in favor of giving orgasmic pleasure and less concerned about fidelity. A favorite saying among the men in our group was, “Let’s go jam in Gojam!”
POSTED FEB. 9, 1999
Paine E., male <starswirler@geocities.com>, Tampa , FL
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE85: I recently read that the date Christians use as the birth date of Jesus is the birth date of Tammuz, a sun god, and that the symbol of this god is the cross. Does anyone have any further information regarding this?
POSTED AUG. 1, 1998
L.A.M., Sidney, NY

ANSWER 1:
From my understanding of Christian history, Christians used a pagan holiday to make their celebrations less conspicuous. I believe Dec. 25 is the Roman “feast of the undefeatable sun” because after that date, the days get noticeably longer. If they celebrated on an off day, that would be more noticed and more likely to bring persecution. Further, Romans crucified many people (not just Jesus). But since that is how he died (for us and our sins) it has become a symbol of his sacrifice for us.
POSTED SEPT. 1, 1998
Andy, 26, Catholic, New York, NY

FURTHER NOTICE:
Your question was a good one. It is believed by Bible scholars that Jesus was born sometime before December – probably in October, though the Bible doesn’t give us an exact date. The Jews did not in that time celebrate birth dates, so birth dates were recorded only as the year and events happening at the time. Jesus died in the spring of 33. C.E. at 33 1/2 years old. Moreover, at the time of his birth, shepherds were “living out of doors and keeping watches in the night over their flocks.” In Israel, late December is a cold, rainy season during which sheep would be kept in shelters overnight. The Dec. 25th date came from the Romans and apostate, Christians adopted this date as Christ’s birth. Search for Truth and you can find it.
POSTED SEPT. 23, 1998
Ruth M. <ruthmcgill@ivillage> Asheboro, N.C.

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
Under the calender in use at the time, Dec. 25 was the shortest day of the year – the Winter Solstice. It is used as the birthdate of numerous sun gods, including Attis, Mithra, Horus, Quirinus, Indra and others, all preceding the Christ myth, and all containing elements such as a son of god, virgin birth, crucifixation on a cross or tree, resurrection, reappearance to followers and ascension to heaven. The fact is, all the dates in the Christian myth are borrowed from earlier traditions. Some writers say such dates were used because they were already known at the time, making it simpler to convert people to the new “approved” faith. The book Pagan Christs by J.M. Robertson presents a brief comparison of some of the earlier “SUNS of God” to the Christ story.
POSTED FEB. 2, 1999
Ed H., male <EdHam0132@aol.com>, Silver Springs, FL

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
I don’t know enough about the worship of Tammuz to answer your question specifically. However, the Winter Solstice has been celebrated in nearly every culture. When the early Christian missionaries went to convert the Pagans of Europe, they adopted the Solstice as a time for the worshipping of Christ. Many “Christmas” traditions are in fact Pagan remnants.
POSTED FEB. 10, 1999
Molly S., 38, white female, Pagan <stormborn@uswest.net>, Phoenix, AZ
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE84: Creationists believe the universe, planets and life came from God. My question is, who or what created God?
POSTED JULY 29, 1998
Bob, 38, agnostic, TX

ANSWER 1:
In my spiritual world, I call God anything I don’t think I can or will ever know. I don’t pray to God, I don’t ask God for things, and I don’t blame God for things. God simply is.
POSTED AUG. 27, 1998
Bakum, white Jewish) male <bakum@bigfoot.com>, San Francisco, CA

FURTHER NOTICE:
I’ll answer that question if you can answer this one: Which is longer, a line or a ray? A line goes infinitely in both directions, a ray goes infinitely in one direction. The answer, of course, is that the question is unanswerable. Infinity is infinity, or forever, whether in one direction or two. The same applies to the power and existence of God. Although we humans tend to think we are pretty smart, we really are so feeble in our simple-minded logic there is no way we can truly understand God. God has always been and always will be. God just IS. All time is NOW to God. We tend to try to apply the same spacio-temporal laws we live by to God, the maker of the laws. It doesn’t work that way. I don’t claim to have any understanding beyond anyone else; I just realize that I am unable to understand God except in what He has revealed of Himself. A similar question I’ve heard before is can God make a rock so big He can’t lift it? Same logic as before, it implies a misconception of comparing infinity to infinity and one being bigger.
POSTED AUG. 31, 1998
Eric R., 27 <ericandjjrubio@mindspring.com>, Monroe, GA

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I agree that God is unknowable. There is no logical argument that can ever prove or disprove the existence of any supernatural being. Squabbling over specifics is irrelevant. From what I gather, the point is to have faith and not question the specifics of the story. The question implies the philosophical assumption that everything must have come from somewhere. By the way, mathematicians do distinguish between degrees of infinity. A line actually is longer than a ray.
POSTED SEPT. 4, 1998
Joshua, agnostic <schnids@bigfoot.com>, Pittsburgh, PA

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
God is eternal and has no begining and no end. He is beyond our capability to completely comprehend. He is the Creator and we are the creation. I’ve always found it interesting to ask agnostics the same question, namely, before the Big Bang when the universe emerged from nothing, who or what existed to set the process in motion?
POSTED JAN. 29, 1999
Peter P., Roman Catholic, Redford , MI

FURTHER NOTICE 4:
God exists outside of our concept of linear time, therefore He has no beginning and no end (or you might say He is the beginning and the end, the Alpha and the Omega). Because of this, there is nothing that came before Him to create Him. This is difficult to grasp for many humans, because we live in an existence where time is linear.
POSTED JAN. 29, 1999
Stephen S., 31, Catholic-Episcopalian, San Antonio, TX

FURTHER NOTICE 5:
I believe humans created gods out of a need to explain the mysteries of the cosmos (i.e. Where did it all come from?) and out of a need to give character to the underlying life force within all inhabitors of the planet.
POSTED JAN. 29, 1999
Gypsy (Eclectic Neopagan) <gypc@accessus.net>
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE83: My six-year-old daughter would like to know why only Native American men and not women are allowed to dance around fires in the tribes that have these traditions.
POSTED JULY 28, 1998
Grant and Katie, 35 & 6 <artmcm@aol.com>, Jacksonville, FL

ANSWER 1:
It’s very tricky and probably inaccurate to generalize about Indian traditions since there are several hundred different ones in the United States alone. But from what I know, most traditions believe in the separation of masculine and feminine roles, power and influence. There are also many rituals that are for women and girls alone. Some tribeshave had women warriors and did allow them to take part in warrior rituals. Please don’t get any ideas that all Indians believe in the subordination of women or the “squaw” (which is a crude word meaning vagina) stereotype from old movies. There are some tribal nations that have that problem, but there are also many that are traditionally female-led or at least with a great deal of female influence.

Your daughter has been misled by someone practicing what is called projection, projecting your own wrongful traits onto other cultures (in this case discrimination against women). There are hundreds of different tribal traditions with many variations. But in general, most Indian peoples believe in separate roles for men and women. A few tribes are male-dominated and some have special dances set aside for warriors only (sometimes including women warriors). Many are female dominated, with women as head of the household. But in general,Indians traditionally practice separate spheres of influence for men and women, such as different councils for each group.
POSTED NOV. 10, 1998
A.C.C., Mexican and American Indian, San Antonio, TX

FURTHER NOTICE:
It depends on the dance and the tribe.
POSTED JAN. 20, 1999
Steven, 29, Cherokee, male, Dallas, TX
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE82: Occasionally I experience anti-Catholic bias from some Protestant Christians. I understand that since the Reformation there was a general feeling of distrust directed toward Roman Catholics by the sects that broke away, but why do some people still hold on to that distrust? What is it about Catholics that scares certain fellow Christians?
POSTED JULY 27, 1998
Stephen S., 31, Catholic, San Antonio, TX

ANSWER 1:
There are many reasons I have an anti-Catholic bias. For one, I feel there is a high degree of hypocrisy in the Catholic church, such as the practice of annulments (allowing people to pay the church to get out of a marriage “honorably”). I have even seen this done in marriages that yielded children. Many Catholics, I have observed, feel that they only have to go to Christmas and Easter mass, and confession. The very act of confession is against my beliefs about Christ. My church feels that Christ is our high priest, and therefore confession is only placing unnecessary middlemen between us and the work God would do in our hearts. Many Catholics I have known feel that as long as they confess their sins and go to mass every now and then, they are still Christians and free to sin as they please. Other denominations are guilty of this, but it seems to be a pattern. A related issue is that it was hundreds of years before the Catholic church began to hold mass in the vernacular, withholding God from the people. The Catholic church is also very oppressive of women, not allowing them to be priests. Additionally, the icons (saints, virgin Mary, etc.) that are prayed to are considered a form of idolatry by many Protestant denominations. The leadership of the Pope also frustrates many Protestants. We feel that his leadership allows Catholics to simply follow him, and not analyze for themselves whether things are biblically sound or not, such as birth control, abortion or communism. To me, Catholicism seems to be a weak faith, one that allows for spiritual flabbiness through the delegation of responsibility in the church structure (priests, pope, bishops, etc.) that has flourished because of early missions to underdeveloped countries.

In general, the Catholic church does not offer the freedom of worship and individualism that I desire out of a church. Many kinds of music are prohibited in Catholic services, and speaking in tongues (a biblical doctrine – see Acts) in a Catholic mass would be unacceptable to parishioners. I have been told by Catholics that I am demon-possessed and a member of a cult because of this, so maybe that relates to my bias.
POSTED SEPT. 4, 1998
Julie H., Protestant, Assemblies of God, Springfield, MO

FURTHER NOTICE:
Julie, a lot of your information is outdated or highly inaccurate (i.e. praying to icons is considered idolatry in the Catholic Church – the paintings and statues are simply symbolic, like stone-carved Buddhas and Nativity sets). I elected to leave the Catholic Church a few years ago, not because I disliked the religion specifically, but because organized religion in general does not hold appeal for me. However, prior to that I received 12 years of education on my faith. I would suggest that you talk to someone credible and educated on this topic, and you may find that the behaviors you’re referencing are those of “bad” Catholics. In other words, the Catholic Church does not approve of some of these things either. Other things are inaccurate – there are groups that speak in tongues within Catholicism. When you’re gathering information, be sure to consider the source. Catholicism has gone through a lot of changes in the past 30 years, but many of those have not yet caught up with public perception.
POSTED SEPT. 5, 1998
D.M.M., white, female, ex-Catholic <donikam@hotmail.com>, Charleston, SC

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
I am surprised Julie H.’s response was posted. It seems to me that it falls somewhat outside the bounds of what discussion on this forum is supposed to be. In any case, I would like to add my two cents on the issue of anti-Catholic bias. It is my perception that anti-Catholic bias has less to do with the actual religion than it does with the ethnicity of the Catholics themselves. The United States was founded and dominated by white, Anglo-Saxon Protestants, and since the very beginning there has been prejudice against Catholics. A lot of Irish are Catholic, and there was a ton of prejudice against the Irish. The same goes for Italians and many Germans and Mexicans, etc. The same people who were looked at as being different because they weren’t “white” (the Irish were called “black”) were also discriminated against because they had a different religion.
POSTED SEPT. 9, 1998
Wendy D., 24, non-practicing Methodist <wiebke@juno.com>, Atlanta, GA

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
A part of the answer might be found in the responses to RE72. For a lot of Christians, the idea that anyone can come between a believer and God is heretical. That would include statutes, saints, priests and the Pope. Christians believe that they have a direct, personal relationship with God and can and should talk to Him directly, not through an intermediary. To some Christians, the statues in Catholic churches seem like idolatry. Many Christians find the Catholic rituals to be scary and mysterious. Another issue is the great deal of publicity the Catholic Church has gotten in the last 10 years or so for child molestation by priests; and then it seems that many times the church simply transfers these priests or covers up the allegations. This type of behavior runs counter to living a moral and ethical lifestyle, which we expect from our clerics.
POSTED JAN. 12, 1999
Sara, female, Oakland, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 4:
I think it’s from not understanding the Catholic religion. The main questions I’ve gotten from friends are “Why do Catholics pray to Mary? She’s not God” and “Why do Catholics pray to saints? Isn’t that idolatry?” Occasionally I get something about the infallability of the Pope, and I don’t think issues such as the sex scandals with priests that occurred a little while back help, either. Mostly people don’t understand the first two questions, I’ve found.
POSTED JAN. 14, 1999
Marissa L. 15, Catholic, female <lytylfyly@hotmail.com>, Sault Ste. Marie , MI

FURTHER NOTICE 5:
I’ve been both, and the real reason is that the heart of Protestant theology is protest against religious authority. Protestants broke away from the Catholic Church and the authority of Rome by declaring that the Bible alone was the sole basis of the Christian faith. When asked to define a cult, for instance, the Protestant will declare “anyone who claims you need another source to correctly interpret the Bible.” This includes Catholics. The further the group’s theology and Biblical interpretation is from Catholicism, typically the more fearful and antagonistic they are toward Catholics. Some denominations go as far as embracing Catholic heresies in their theologies (“Name it and claim it” churches have a strong dose of gnosticism in their teachings, for instance) and will almost kick you out the door for being Catholic. I’ve been there. I know.
POSTED JAN. 19, 1999
Peter P., Roman Catholic, Redford, MI

FURTHER NOTICE 6:
Growing up in a Baptist church, I can tell you there is a lot of disagreement with certain Catholic “ceremonies.” For instance, the confessional – as long as God knows what you did and how you feel about it and you have asked his forgiveness, why is it anyone else’s business? My pastor has plenty of more important things to do than listen to my shortcomings. Also the Hail Marys – she was obviously a fantastic women to be chosen as the mother of Jesus, but she is not God and therefore does not need to be prayed to. I’m not saying the Catholic Church has it all wrong – after all, it was the Catholic monks who labored to give us the Bible. It is the same source of contention among all denominations – interpretation. Just look at how many different “kinds” of Baptists exist.
POSTED JAN. 21, 1999
Mel, Baptist, Sand Springs, OK
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE81: Why do people believe in religious dogma that is more than 2,000 years old?
Fred C. , Corvallis, OR

ANSWER 1:
By 2,000 years, I assume you meant Judeo-Christianity. As a Christian, I don’t believe in “religious dogma,” but in God. One of the reasons I believe is that I have experienced God working in my life. Also, I believe God is not dead, but alive and therefore active and important today. History is almost always applicable because the nature of humanity hasn’t changed – lessons can be learned from the past. The Bible is like this. Shakespeare is still moving people, even though his works are hundreds of years old and contain customs few today readily understand. Both contain truths about humanity and are still relevant. I was never taught the Bible as dogma. It’s seen by many in my church as a way to get to know God and as instruction for life, but not to be made your god. Jesus warned against obeying the law over serving God.
POSTED AUG. 17, 1998
Julie H., 19, Christian, Springfield, MO

FURTHER NOTICE:
I assume by religious dogma you are referring to the beliefs practiced by many denominations today. Actually, most of the ways current Christians practice are very different from the early church. Keep in mind that the early church had no history of Christians to pull from. The first Christians were a hybrid of Jews, Romans, Greeks and others. Many of the cultural practices of these people filtered into church practice over the years. Keep in mind, though, that Jesus himself condemned the holier than thou church leaders of his time, the Sanhedrin, or the Jewish leaders. Following church dogma will not get you to heaven by Christ’s teachings. We are saved only by God’s forgiveness of our selfish sinful nature. It took Christ’s sacrifice in our place for this grace to be given to us. Christ taught to love and serve one another. This is what the early church did. You’ll see this if you read the book of Acts and Paul’s writings.
POSTED AUG. 31, 1998
Eric R., 27 <ericandjjrubio@mindspring.com>, Monroe, GA

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
Does the phrase “built to last” ring a bell? For me, it is difficult to understand why people would put faith in a religion that has not stood the test of time. Actually, I think most religions claim to be eternal (i.e. a lot older than 2,000 years!), but some have more historical evidence backing their claim. The thing I love most about my faith, the Mass, is its timelessness. It combines the basic elements of food, drink and story, but then allows the freedom to be adapted over time and in different places, to meet the needs of believers Here and Now.
POSTED OCT. 19, 1998
Judy F., 36, Episcopalian <alexant@juniata.edu>, Huntingdon , PA

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
When one considers the early origins of Christianity, not to mention the types of people who practiced it, it is a wonder it survived 1,000, let alone two. I feel religion in general, and Christianity in particular, to be a reassurance that at the end of life, there is something more. Christianity, more than any other religion, seems to promote this idea, and requires little of anyone seeking it. All the early Christians were required to do was be lowly and humble, which generally wasn’t a problem for them. Small wonder then that it supplanted the older faiths, which required far more of their followers. A pity…
POSTED DEC. 16, 1998
Elric L., Pagan, 29 <elefay@hotmail.com>, Pasadena, MD

FURTHER NOTICE 4:
You may as well ask, “Why do people still believe in gravity after all these years?” Because it still works. With the Judeo-Christian religion, at least, it has never been conclusively debunked, and there remain strong arguments in it’ favor despite 2000-plus years of heated debate. There’s no real good reason to discard it.
POSTED JAN. 19, 1999
Peter P., male, Roman Catholic <PPROUT20@aol.com>, Redford, MI

FURTHER NOTICE 5:
Because it has stood the test of time. God has not changed. He is the God of all time, and His Word is still relevant in the 1990s.
POSTED JAN. 27, 1999
T. Arthur, Christian <MrsArthur1@aol.com>, Sterling Heights, MI