Religion Questions 91-100

THE QUESTION:
RE100: Whenever I tell a Catholic I am an atheist, I get told “You’re too young to have made that decision.” How can anyone say this, knowing that the standard age for confirmation is about 13?
POSTED SEPT. 30, 1998
Stef, female, 19 <Sidhe_devil@hotmail.com>, Windsor, Ontario, Canada

ANSWER 1:
My friend told his parents at age 12 that he was no longer going to church because he did not believe there was a God. He is now 27 and still believes the same thing, although he lives a life of helping and loving others.
POSTED NOV. 16, 1998
Craig, 35, Christian <cmorris@loft.org>, Minneapolis MN
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE99: To Jewish people: For Christians, Jesus was the final blood sacrifice for salvation, ending the need for burnt offerings on the altar for purification. This being rejected by Jews, why don’t they continue the sacrifice of livestock/harvest as the Old Testament illustrated and commanded?
POSTED SEPT. 28, 1998
Tobie H., 42 Christian, Oakland, CA

ANSWER 1:
To my knowledge, when the Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans in 70 A.D., the records of who was a Levite (able to render sacrifices) and who wasn’t were lost. Now, no Jew knows if he/she is descended from a Levite or not. I may be wrong, but I think this may be the case.
POSTED OCT. 26, 1998
Brian R., Bible student <MARQUIS111@AOL.COM>, FL

FURTHER NOTICE:
It’s not quite as specific as that. With the destruction of the second temple, the Jews’ place of worship was destroyed and the vast majority were exiled until the late 19th century. In the 6th-7th century BC a directive was issued by the priests that animal sacrifices could only be made in the temple in Jerusalem – this directive was aimed at stopping the assimilation of foreign cultures and customs into the Jewish worship in the regions removed from Jerusalem. (And remember, back then, a distance a 20 or 30 kilometres could be a completely different world.) It was at about this time (even before the destruction of the second temple) that the synagogue was invented – prayer replacing sacrifice. The Jewish worship now consists mainly of prayer with some rituals – lighting candles on Friday night, building a tabernacle on Succot, etc. Nowadays, Jews are no longer interested in sacrificing animals to their God; the ritual is no longer considered acceptable. Although extremely orthodox Jews will tell you this is because the third temple has not yet been built, the majority of practicing Jews consider ritual sacrifice abhorent and unsuitable for today’s religion. This happens. Religions change, they grow. They do this at a crawl and with no small resistance, but it happens. Catholics don’t say mass in Latin anymore, Europeans have stopped burning witches and Jews don’t feel the need for animal sacrifice. P.S. We do have a pretty good idea of who the descendants of the priests and Levites are today.
POSTED NOV. 27, 1998
Abigail N., 17, Jewish female, Israel
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE98: I go to a Baptist school but am Lutheran. I get insulted, beat up on, picked on and hated. I have no friends, only enemies. I get made fun of because Lutherans drink real wine at communion and they (Baptists) use grape juice. Is it wrong to use wine? They say that if Jesus drank wine at the Last Supper, he would have broken his Nazarite vow and sinned.
POSTED SEPT. 27, 1998
13, Lutheran, Texas
(DIRECTOR’S NOTE: Upon receiving this question, Y? received an e-mail from the boy’s father saying he and his wife had not known of their son’s problem until he posted to Y?, and that they would appreciate any advice from users on how to handle the situation.)

ANSWER 1:
Wine was used frequently in Biblical times because safe drinking water was hard to come by. Yes, it had less alcohol than today’s commercial wine, but it did contain alcohol. A Nazarene is a person from Nazareth. Jesus was a Nazarene. A Nazarite is a member of a religious sect that did abstain from wine. John the Baptist was a Nazarite, but there is no evidence that Jesus was. Disagreements like this are nothing new to the church. Read Romans 14 to see what Paul said about things like this. And remember the words of Romans 12:18, “Whenever possible, so far as it depends on you, live at peace with all people.” To the parents, speak to your school administrators immediately. It’s bad enough that abuse like this happens in public school, but in a so-called Christian school, it is inexcusable! My prayers are with you all.
POSTED SEPT. 29, 1998
Stacee, 30, Christian, former Baptist, Houston, TX

FURTHER NOTICE:
I was raised Baptist, attended a Baptist school and went to a Baptist University. The apostle Paul tells us to drink a little wine for the stomach’s sake. Baptists will say this was unfermented wine and therefore grape juice, but Paul also says “be not drunk with wine, but be filled with the Spirit,” so this would strongly imply that he was not referring to grape juice, unless one can get drunk on Welches! Don’t let a few sour grapes spoil you on your quest for spiritual truth. Good luck to you.
POSTED SEPT. 29, 1998
Steve N. <blaster7@hotmail.xom>, Dallas, TX

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
This is an issue I think you should discuss with your parents, and if I were your parent, I would discuss it with school officials. I would guess that your parents, although Lutherans, do not hold ill feelings toward Baptists or they wouldn’t send you to that school. It doesn’t seem that your folks want you to learn to use religion as a “cover” for acting badly, as your schoolmates seem to be doing. Letters, stories and teachings that were written a few thousand years ago (at some point becoming what we call the Bible) can be translated and interpreted in many ways, and they certainly have been. Those writings have been used by many people for many purposes. It would be nice to think that they were used only for good, but they have been used as excuses for wars, teaching prejudice and denying peoples’ rights. I can’t and won’t tell you what to believe, but I don’t believe the basis for any true faith is to make anyone feel bad. What you believe and what you practice are for you to decide, and as long as you’re not harming anyone or anything in the process, you should not feel that your way is “wrong.” I wish you peace and harmony.
POSTED SEPT. 29, 1998
Darbma, 44, no exclusive religion <darbymom@hotmail.com>, New York , NY

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
Your parents should tell the school authorities of the continuous torture you seem to be going through in school. Kids generally enjoy harrassing kids who are a bit different, and they continue until there is a new/weak kid on the block. Hopefully, when your parents talk to the school authorities, the torture will stop, or at least subside. Have you considered changing to another school?? That may be a good idea.
POSTED SEPT. 29, 1998
Ify <ifebigh77@hotmail.com>, Miami FL

FURTHER NOTICE 4:
Part of your situation has less to do with religon than it does with being different. In life you’ll meet people who think different equals wrong. As an overweight child, I received similar abuse at my own Baptist church. The hardest thing I had to learn at 13 was that different was not bad. Different is Different, and it is our differences that make us special. People want to belong, and sometimes they feel that striking out at those who are different will make them seem more a part of the group. I can’t tell you whether drinking wine is wrong. That’s something you have to work out for yourself, but I can tell you that just because someone else thinks it’s wrong, it doesn’t mean that it is. Follow your heart and respect the differences and opinions of others without allowing them to be forced upon you.
POSTED SEPT. 29, 1998
Brianna A., 20, Ex-Baptist, <helsie@geocities.com>, Houston, TX
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE97: What is the true meaning of B.C. and A.D. in terms of time?
POSTED SEPT. 23, 1998
John, 25, <JOHN.BARDUCA@SECLP.COM>, Pinckney, MI

ANSWER 1:
As far as I know, B.C. stands for “Before Christ,” or that time prior to the birth of Jesus. A.D. stands for “Anno Domini,” which is Latin for “Year of our Lord.”
POSTED SEPT. 25, 1998
Stephen S., 31, Catholic/Episcopalian, San Antonio , TX

FURTHER NOTICE:
Other terms in use to denote the same thing are “BCE” (Before Current Era) and “CE” (Current Era), counting, of course from the same supposed date. That date was set several hundred years after the alleged events took place. Recently I read of a Jewish judge in Miami who instructed lawyers he would no longer sign anything with”A.D.” on it, for obvious reasons. I would support such a decision, and believe we should move to the terms described above, which don’t denote anyone’s “lord.”
POSTED MARCH 23, 1999
Ed H., white male, 57, atheist <EdHam0132@aol.com>, Silver Springs, FL
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE96: I would like to know from Catholics who have “converted” to other denominations such as Baptist, Lutheran, etc., what kind of effect the change has had on your spiritual life. Do you feel closer to God, have a better understanding of Heaven, etc.?
POSTED SEPT. 22, 1998
Suzanne, 29, non-denominational, Redmond, WA

ANSWER 1:
Having changed from a Catholic background to a Baptist style, I found the following differences: Spiritually, evangelicals (Baptists) study the Bible together and try to understand why something is right or wrong. Each congregation is autonomous (separately governed), and so no huge Church can dictate morals. Socially, I feel people are much more supportive in the evangelical churches. When I attended the Catholic church, after service I went home. Where I am now, after service, people visit. There is support for those needing support, be it friendship or prayer. Prayerwise, prayer is much more personal. I speak to Jesus as my friend, not as an Almighty God (who He is) who doesn’t care about us mere mortals. Doctrinally, the Baptist and other evangelical churches are simpler. Basic beliefs number about 7 to 10. Roman Catholic canon laws number more than 1,000. If it isn’t in the Bible, it isn’t important for evangelicals.
POSTED SEPT. 24, 1998
A. Urbonas <urbonas@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca>, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE95: Do Jewish people prefer to be called “Jewish” or “Jews”? To me the word “Jew” just sounds derogatory, and I prefer to call Jewish people Jewish.
POSTED SEPT. 7, 1998
Whitney T., 19, black female <wkthomps@olemiss.edu>, Oxford, MS

ANSWER 1:
Considering some of the less-attractive alternatives, I don’t have a problem with either of the choices. It’s really more of a grammatical issue — “Jew” is a noun and “Jewish” is an adjective.
POSTED SEPT. 9, 1998
Andrew, 34, Jewish (or a Jew, take your pick) <ziptron@hotmail.com>, Huntington, NY

FURTHER NOTICE:
I feel Jew sounds derogatory and Jewish people does not. I am Jewish and have often lived and worked among non-Jewish people. The word Jew always sends chills up my spine. Why? I’m not sure. It’s a gut reaction. I think if I have to analyze my feeling further, I’d say it’s because all the derogatory adjectives precede the term Jew and not Jewish person. Dirty Jew is impersonal. If you said “You’re a dirty Jewish person,” it would sound silly or too personal, and you just wouldn’t say it.
POSTED OCT. 13, 1998
Lorie, Jewish female whose mother was born Christian Scientist, New York, NY

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
Strictly speaking, I don’t think the word “Jew” is inherently derogatory. What matters, of course, is the context the word is placed in. That being said, I would echo the previous comment. I also have this “gut” feeling the word “Jew,” especially when used alone without any adjectives, at least “sounds” potentially sinister. For example, the sentence “Jeff is Jewish” seems much more pleasant to me than the more ominous sounding “Jeff is a Jew” (at least it sounds ominous to me). On the other hand, a sentence like “Jeff is an Orthodox Jew” seems perfectly all right with me because there is a benign adjective (besides, you can’t say “Orthodox Jewish”). Again, I think it’s important to focus on the context. I believe the concern over the use of the word “Jew” has more to do with the historical context it’s been used in and the tone that has often gone along with its utterance, rather than the word itself.
POSTED NOV. 19, 1998
Mihir, Indian/Jain, 25 <mishah@vt.edu>, Skokie, IL

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
Jew or Jewish works for me. I have no problem saying with pride that I am a Jew or that I am a Jewish American. I wouldn’t say I’m a Jew-American. (I might say I’m an American Jew, however). In Israel, I’ve heard people greet each other on the street “Hey Jew!” It is not derogatory – it’s sort of a reaction to make it a legitimate greeting. (Like “Hey, man”!) Of course, the context and intonation matter as with any word. I dont like “Jew” used as a verb, i.e. “I “jewed” him down,”etc. I think that is just downright nasty. It is an unfounded, false expletive.
POSTED NOV. 23, 1998
Mark, Jew/Jewish, San Francisco Bay Area, CA
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE94: I am an outsider trying to understand Christianity. Was Jesus Christ supposed to be a mortal son of God, an immortal son of God, or actually God Himself in human form?
POSTED SEPT. 4, 1998
Joshua, 20, agnostic, male <schnids@bigfoot.com>, Pittsburgh, PA

ANSWER 1:
I believe your answer lies in the question. Jesus Christ was all of those things: A mortal (meaning “of the flesh”). Jesus cried, felt pain, required food, etc. We are shown just how mortal He was when He was in the garden of Gethsemene, praying before he was captured and taken to be crucifed. He prayed for God to “remove this cup from me” (meaning the crucifixion). If at all possible, Jesus didn’t want to go through the agony of crucifixion but nevertheless, he prayed “not my will Father, but yours be done.” He was/is immortal in that He is alive today, He was raised from the dead and is seated at the right hand of the Father. And Jesus was God incarnate on Earth (hence the Trinity: Father, Son, Holy Ghost). The book of Genesis in the first chapter gives a good explanation of the trinity of God and the existence of God in trinity.
POSTED SEPT. 5, 1998
Nikole, 25, Southern Baptist, Birmingham, AL
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE93: Do some Christians, Baptists, etc. believe in evolution? And why do most creationists (mainly fundamentalists) close their ears to the idea of evolution? Can they not accept it as God’s way?
POSTED SEPT. 3, 1998
J.Williams, Quaker <1krazykat@widowmaker.com>, Williamsburg, VA

ANSWER 1:
Having grown up a child of science, I used to believe in evolution, tacitly. Over the years, science has proven itself less reliable; the Bible more so. At some point, I decided to trust the Bible with greater conviction than I trusted science. The Bible says God created the heavens, the earth, the animals and man. Evolution says man got here through a series of unguided, unintelligent processes and mutations of primitive organisms. Even modifying the standard scientific definition of evolution to allow a “God-guided” process, I refute that on the basis of the trustworthiness of the Bible. If that is what happened, that’s what the Bible would say. Furthermore, my God is big enough to create man out of dust. He doesn’t need an intermediate process to do it. If He did and documented otherwise in the Bible, that makes God out to be a liar and not worthy of our worship or trust.
POSTED SEPT. 7, 1998
Dario I., 34, Christian <ballpeen@mailexcite.com>, San Carlos, CA

FURTHER NOTICE:
I think the reason is that they are fundamentalists. I believe that they tend to interpret the Bible literally. When the book of Genesis says that God created man in seven days, they would interpret that as our current seven days. I always wonder what, during that prehistoric time, was the definition of a “day”? Was there a concept of what is now “day”?
POSTED SEPT. 10, 1998
P.H., 32, St Paul, MN

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
Here is something for everyone to think about. What we call “Creationism,” or the belief that the events and details given in the Bible are an actual, exact account of the creation and history of the world, has only been around a few hundred years. Many of the groups that believed in that came to that belief because of the deep differences between the rising scientific theories and the accepted Church “truth.” A great example is Galileo – executed by the Church for daring to say the Earth went around the Sun, against the doctrine of the Church. Most of the groups that fled Europe, many of them extremists within their own religions, came to America and spread Creationist beliefs. That is why this viewpoint is so prevalent in our country. Even the Catholic Church accepts the Big Bang as part of Creation (or so the Pope told British physicist Stephen Hawking some years ago). The point is that the Bible, especially the Old Testament, was always meant to be a mixture of history and allegory. The vast majority of Jews will agree that the story of Creation is not meant to be taken literally. To make the point further, consider that in the New Testament, Jesus uses parables to make his point clear, not actual, literal events. The story of the prodigal son is not meant to be seen as a real and historical event … the story was told to make a philosophical point, to drive home a moral tenet … and the Bible as a whole should be seen the same way. For more information, read A History of God by Karen Armstrong, or other books on the same subject.
POSTED SEPT. 10, 1998
John K., straight Irish-American male, 25 <the-macs@geocities.com>, Cranford, NJ

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
As a Christian I believe in both the creation and evolution theories. God has no use for “time.” What is a second to Him may be days to humans. In the creation story it took God six “days” to create and get Earth going. On the seventh day He rested. Who is to say that these “days” weren’t really millions of years? Where God is, in heaven, there is no day or night. How can one determine the beginning or ending of a certain day? Still, I am also skeptical of the evolution theory. Although I tend to accept it as God’s way of creating, I wonder if all the scientific evidence of evolution was not placed there by Satan to confuse Christians.
POSTED SEPT. 23, 1998
Courtney C., 18, Southern Baptist <pixiesparkle@theglobe.com>, Raleigh, NC

FURTHER NOTICE 4:
At the heart of the matter is a desire to see the universe as an orderly place. Those who believe in a God as many Christians do – a father figure who guides all aspects of human life – abhor evolution not because it contradicts what they believe, which it doesn’t, but offends their sensibilities, their desire to have a grand and wise father who doesn’t have to resort to messy and time-consuming processes to do his work. As a fallen Southern Baptist, I have thought and talked about this a lot, and I believe that what most offends many is not the theory of evolution but science in general, which many believe (perhaps rightly) is taking the place of religion in society. Therefore, they approach it with mistrust in the first place. Those who adamantly oppose evolution are revealing their own insecurity, in that they know, intellectually, that the Bible (or their interpretation of it) cannot be factually accurate, so they lash out doubly so at any interpretation that might seem to water down that irrational belief. Those who prefer to rely on an oft-edited, revised, often illogical and contradictory complilation of stories and fables as a guideline for their intellectual exploration (or lack thereof) feel threatened by evolution because it’s a theory they don’t understand and one they feel somehow drags man down to the level of animals. The more intelligent who still refuse to look beyond the Bible for answers resort to poking holes in what is, after all, a still-emerging theory. The open-minded understand that there’s plenty of room in their faith (which can be a very good thing) to make room for scientific inquiry and progress, and understand that evolution is as miraculous a process in its way as God breathing life into earth to create Adam.
POSTED DEC. 14, 1998
J. Wilkerson <jwilker@ptd.net>, Allentown, PA

FURTHER NOTICE 5:
Whether one believes life as we know it was created in the Garden of Eden, or by some dust molecules coming together in some sort of “big bang” event, I find it hard that anyone would deny that evolution is an integral part of life on Earth. One only has to look at the history of and at Life itself in the form of the changes experienced by humankind and the floral and fauna on Earth to know that evolution does happen. I feel there has to be some incredible power, call it God or whatever, that had some influence on creation and its evolution, moreso than just a couple of spacedust particles coming together to form planets (where did the dust come from?), and yet, at the same time, I find the story of Adam and Eve a bit too simplistic for such an incredible event as the creation/evolution/development of whole worlds.
POSTED DEC. 16, 1998
Paul D., 39, Christian and Earth inhabitant <pdeeming@rnc.net>, Eagan , MN

FURTHER NOTICE 6:
The story of creation states that God made the heavens and the earth in seven days. Some people take this quite literally, thinking God did this in what we consider a week. Well, who’s to say that a day for God is 24 hours? In my opinion, many stories in the Bible are myths, such as the creation story and the story of Adam and Eve. People throughout history have made up stories to explain the world around them. Have you ever read Greek mythology? Fantastic stories. I love them. We have four seasons because Persephone ate some pommegranate seeds while she was in the Underworld. Naturally. Storms are caused by Zeus throwing thunderbolts down to the earth. Of course. Women have pain in childbirth because Eve ate some fruit. Is this story any more plausible than the others? I think not. I am a Christian, and I have a very strong belief in God and the Bible. However, I feel people must be open-minded to science, not afraid of it or of what we have to learn about our existence from it. Evolution was God’s idea, if you ask me.
POSTED DEC. 18, 1998
Shari D., 27, protestant Christian, Canton , MI
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE92: It seems to me that of all of the stereotypes I have heard, the one that says Jewish people as a whole seem to be rather thrifty is true. Is it, and if so, why?
POSTED AUG. 28, 1998
Chris, white <CASaquanut@aol.com>, Venice, FL

ANSWER 1:
There are so many misconceptions about this it is unbelieveable. Right in Tampa you have the Glazers, who have spent a large sum of money to buy the Tampa Bay Bucs. I have had people say “Jewed him down” to my face, thinking I was Italian. Yet I work in retail and I find everyone is looking for the best price. I have been “Gentiled down,” WASP’d down,” Afro-American’d down,” Chinese, Japanese, English, German, etc. Maybe the Jews started thrifty, but the myth has really caught on. The other misconception is that Jewish people have all the money and run everything. Look to Fortune Magazine for the richest Americans and if you are lucky somewhere in the mid 100s you’ll find your first Jewish name, usually Sy Sims and his family, who own a chain of clothing stores. But out of the 500 or so names listed maybe 5 percent are Jewish. No bank owners or radio station owners or newspaper editors. For the most part it is all a lie put out by those who want Jews to be persecuted more than they already have.
POSTED AUG. 31, 1998
Ned <bohica1111@aol.com>, FL

FURTHER NOTICE:
Another angle to consider is that some people will internalize a stereotype and accept it to such a strong extent that no matter what a person of group “x” (in this case Jews) does, that stereotype will still be mentally “applied” to that person. In other words, if a person at a store’s customer service desk has a legitimate complaint about a product he bought, and that person happens to be Jewish, an observor might still unfairly say to himself, “Oh, look at that cheap Jew over there arguing senselessly with the salesperson,” when in fact a non-Jewish person might not elicit that kind of internal reaction. In other words, the stereotype is used to explain a certain behavior because of someone’s ethnicity, rather than taking the behavior at face value and as an individual case independent of ethnicity. Relatedly, what is the standard for being “thrifty”? Is it the case that a WASP person paying $30,000 for a Mercedes is “getting a good deal,” but a Jewish person paying the same $30,000 for the same Mercedes is “thrifty”? Of course not; we can’t color the situation due to one’s religion or ethnicity.
POSTED NOV. 19, 1998
Mihir, Indian/Jain, 25 <mishah@vt.edu>, Skokie, IL
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
RE91: I would like to know more about the Unitarian denomination. I understand it is sort of a mixture of all religions. Does that mean all Christian religions, orall religions? If all, how do Unitarians determine which “rules” to follow? How do they determine which God to worship?
POSTED AUG. 27, 1998
Amy, 29, white, Yorktown , VA

ANSWER 1:
We believe that one has a responsibility to seek spiritual growth, but should not be constrained by any given dogma or doctrine. This imposes a responsibility to respect the many different ways people approach spiritual growth, hence your misperception that we are a mix of all religions. The Unitarian Universalist Church has a home page at www.uua.org that goes into greater depth.
POSTED SEPT. 25, 1998
Al, Unitarian <alarose@ncwc.edu>, Rocky Mount, NC

FURTHER NOTICE:
There are actually two meanings for “Unitarian.” The first in use was in reference to a Christian who believed in the Unity of God (God/Jesus/Holy Spirit equals God the Father, Jesus the Son, who came to teach us to worship His Father, and the Holy Spirit, a relationship I don’t entirely understand). This was in contrast to the belief in the Trinitarian God (God/Jesus/Holy Spirit equals God). That first usage fell out of favor (although there are many Christians who are not Trinitarians who do not call themselves Unitarian) in favor of the meaning most often found today in the Unitarian Universalist Church. I understand it to mean that divine wisdom is to be found in all the world’s religions, that each of them deserves study, consideration and a degree of reverence. I’ve also found through the UU church that no one really decided to “worship” one God or another, but they more often use (for instance) a Buddhist teaching to approach a life problem one day, and an Islamic sentiment for another, read a chapter of Plato on Sunday morning, then go outside in the sunshine for a celebration of the turning of the seasons.
POSTED NOV. 29, 1998
Shelly, multiracial female <1derwhy@usa.net>