Religous debates and questions

Isn't it better to play with yourself then play with kids.
I play with myself all the time, but scrabble isn't much fun on your own.

So my birthday just hit and I realized that I only have a year left before I ship out for TWO YEARS on a mission... Scary thought....

and doesn't she have an ironic name

Will they let you bring a laptop with an Internet connection on your mission?

Im never quite sure what is meant when modern religous groups go on missions- I tend to get 17th and 18th Century images of well meaning Christians going to the 'primitices', and ending up in the cooking pot!

I assume its less, um, destructive these days to indigenous beliefs and cultures than it once was.

I've met many when traveling. There's all different types, just like with all people, then and now. There are some church missions whose primary mission is doing good works: building sewer and water systems, teaching less destructive and more sustainable forms of agriculture, bringing relief to disaster areas. Things more people should be doing really.

Others are more focused on proselytizing and less on good works. I think it's often actually more beneficial for them than the people they're trying to convert. Too many, especially of the charismatic faith, have grown up in a bubble where they've never had their faith challenged. There's nothing like knocking on doors in a foreign country and trying to explain what you believe to help a person understand what they truly do believe themselves.

Traveling, meeting ordinary people of other cultures and trying to understand how they see the world is never a bad thing.

I hope you're assigned a cool mission, Lorient!

Yep, people think missionaries would be the most dogmatic, but the reverse is usually the case. I worked in a mission school while in west africa, and the missionary in charge told me once that if two people are living together with the knowledge and acceptance of friends and family, then in the eyes of God they are married. none of this wedding nonsense.

Well Lorient, if you end up going to Texas, remember to do what the Roman Catholic Church did to become successful: they melded christian doctrine with local pagan traditions to make things more palatable. In Texas the local pagan traditions are football and barbecue.

They start out idealists and up realists is that what youre are saying Halfwise?



That technique Halfwise goes back to the first few hundred years AD- most European churches are built right on top of the pagan worship sites.
Roman festivals got incorporated and renamed -like Easter. Its their oldest trick in the book- you dont fight the local religion, you just build right over the top of it.

I had a girlfriend who had done missionary work in Sudan with her parents when she was in her early-mid teens. Needless to say, that relationship involved lots of culture shock for both of us.

If I recall correctly, she spend most of her time in Sudan teaching kids to read rather than doing anything especially religious. That sort of surprised me at the time, but that was because I didn't know very much about missions before I met her. I have a few distant relatives who are missionaries but our branches of the family don't see each other very often.

They typical Mormon mission tends to be more of the proselyting type, though elderly and those unfit to serve a full time mission can go on service missions. That being said, full-time missionaries tend to help out people when their help is needed, its not like that isn't allowed, its encouraged. And no one in our church is paid, so there really isn't any money motivation, the missionary (or their family) actually have to pay to go on the mission.

Eldo-Unfortunately, I don't believe I can have a laptop, no major electronics really. Though missionaries do have one day a week where they can use a computer to writs letters and send emails.

I'm not exactly sure where I want to go, though I don't really get a choice. I'd like to go English speaking, but I will do another language if I'm called.

Jesus in the Gospels seemed more interested in helping people than helping God - or Pharisees, Sadducees, though he had a soft spot for sinners. I reckon bringing the means to physically survive to impoverished people is good, so long as Religion is not inflicted on them while they're still vulnerable. Confusing human kindness (real kindness) with God's kindness (unreal kindness) is no good thing, methinks.

Helping the Pharisees and helping God were two distinctly different things.

What is the distinction i n your view Lorient? As I am not clear on it.

Eldorion wrote:I had a girlfriend who had done missionary

Theres a joke there somewhere

Beware, admin sees you.

I can't even be upset because I know that I would have run with that joke if the tables were turned.

Pettytyrant101 wrote:What is the distinction i n your view Lorient? As I am not clear on it.

My view is that the Pharisees were men, who felt comfortable in their positions. They felt threatened by Christ and the people's love of him, as well as him declaring some of their teachings(ie Law of Moses) were no longer valid, which is why they tried to obstruct him in every way. Christ, on the other hand, had an all but direct connection to God, and knew exactly what God wanted/needed him to do. God needed him to come to Earth to Atone for everybody's sins, not help the Pharisees in all their endeavors.

Christ, on the other hand, had an all but direct connection to God, and knew exactly what God wanted/needed him to do.- Lorient

From my own reading of the NT I never got that impression.
Jesus struck me as a man who was absolutely certain that he was speaking on behalf of God, but who seemed far more uncertain, particularly in his own life.
He's not very good at even dealing with his own disciples often, unable to clearly explain himself to them.
He can't get along with his family, and Jospeh gets bumped suspiciously right out the story after Jesus' early childhood.
And his cry of 'Father why have you forsaken me?' on the cross has never struck me as the words of someone who was certain of anything.
And then there is the whole ? over his exact relationship with Mary.


'God needed him to come to Earth to Atone for everybody's sins'

Its always seemed a damned weird way to go about such a thing- the whole Jesus rigmarole.

If I was being more cynical and with more a history hat on, I would say Jesus death and resurrection his sacrifice served the very handy purpose of seperating the new emerging religion from the old with its animal sacrifices.
By making Jesus the ultimate sacrifice the new followers could happily dump that bit, making the religion much more attractive to the growing numbers of urban city dwellers. Sacrificing animals was just so BC!

And the Jesus/son of God/resurrected is a handy blending of the old Magi/Zorasrian/Greek ideas-Gods mating with mortals to produce half-divine beings and the life/death reborn exemplified by Egyptian/Persian thought.
Giving the new religion, in modern parlance, good brand strength and recognition.

Just my musings on the matter.

Just a quick question, what version of the Bible are you reading from? Shouldn't make a major difference, just curious.
We know hardly anything about the rest of Christ's life, the NT goes from when he was a young boy to the last couple weeks of his life. I'm not sure where you get the idea that he didn't get along with his family... His brother, James, seemed to think highly of him.
Could you give an example of how he seemed uncertain (other than the cross bit) because I never got that impression

I will get back to you shortly on this Lorient- I will need to dig out a Bible from the shelves- its King James - and get references to give you a deserving answer.

r u in an ancient dwelmer city? is your bookcase laying on the floor ?

dwelmer?- is that a city populated by the weird offspring of dwemmer and falmer?
My bookcase is a big cupboard, so I hope it hasnt fallen down or I will have a large hole in my wall!