THEO 100-12

Final Examination

Instructor: James Ginther, PhD

Date: Wednesday, 9 May 2012

Time: 12.00-1.50pm

Place: Shannon Hall 203

On the day of the exam, three of the following questions will appear on the exam paper.  Please answer in essay format (full sentences).  Each answer is of equal weight.  Students must avoid repetition between answers (so, for example, if two questions require you to address the issue in relation to two course topics, you must choose two different topics for each answer).

1.  .  Read the following text from Mark 12: 

²⁸ One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?”

²⁹ “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.^[e] 30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ ³¹ The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.”

³² “Well said, teacher,” the man replied. “You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but him. ³³ To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.”

³⁴ When Jesus saw that he had answered wisely, he said to him, “You are not far from the kingdom of God.” And from then on no one dared ask him any more questions.

³⁵ While Jesus was teaching in the temple courts, he asked, “How is it that the teachers of the law say that the Christ is the son of David? ³⁶ David himself, speaking by the Holy Spirit, declared:

“‘The Lord said to my Lord:  “Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies     under your feet.”’

³⁷ David himself calls him ‘Lord.’ How then can he be his son?”

The large crowd listened to him with delight.

³⁸ As he taught, Jesus said, “Watch out for the teachers of the law. They like to walk around in flowing robes and be greeted in the marketplaces, ³⁹ and have the most important seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at banquets. ⁴⁰ They devour widows’ houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. Such men will be punished most severely.”

⁴¹ Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. ⁴² But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a fraction of a penny.

⁴³ Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, “I tell you the truth, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. ⁴⁴ They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on.”

Respond to this claim:  In this passage, Jesus connects the concepts of love, his divinity and the importance of the poor in Christianity.  In this manner, is Jesus making the claim that salvation is ultimately about morality? Your answer should address the argument of this text, as well as any other assigned passages of Scripture that are relevant. 

2       “If Social Justice is one of the higher priorities in Christian theology, does commitment to social justice demand a certain kind of moral life of its practitioners?” Discuss.

3.       Write an account of your conception of God.  Your answer must address at least two course topics and make reference to at least two of the assigned Scriptural readings.

 
4.       One of the main themes of this course has been to explore why theological things “matter,” that is what is their significance.  At the beginning of the semester, all of you completed a written piece on whether Christianity matters to you.  Have your views changed at all? If so, in what ways? If not, explain why that is the case.  Your answer must addresss at least two course topics.

 
5.       “Grace does not replace nature; grace perfects nature.”  Discuss this claim with reference to the Incarnation and salvation.

Key Terms and Concepts for Final Exam Review

Group 1: 

    Salvation
        Redemption – God buying us back
        Parts of sin
            Fallen beings
            Act against God
        Meaning of original sin
            Disorder
            Privation of being and of justice
    What is the point of being good
        Morality should not be imposed but appropriated
        Personal & social distinctions
        You may make a decision that will hurt you, is that anyone else’s business
        Social justice
    What’s the point of talking to other religions
        All one family with regard to race and creed
    Where do we go from here
        Hope of a future / meaning in life

Group 2: 

-   Sin: act against god, moral disposition
-          Ontological: something that changes nature (Adam and Eve changed human nature)
-          Anthropology: delves into what it means to be human
-          Humanity is sempiternal: has a beginning but no end
-          3 worlds of Karl Popper: Physical world, World of Ideas (concrete knowledge), World of the Mind (subjective knowledge)

-          Grace: getting what you done deserve, like a gift, grace perfects nature
-          A sacrament
-          The primordial sacrament: incarnation
-          What’s the point of being good – virtues, being moral
-          Deification: process of becoming a deity, all creation returns to God
-          Habit of Mind / Habit of Action
-          Suffering: everyone experiences it, the common thread between all of humanity, how does suffering lead to happiness
-          7 principles of Social Justice:

1.       Life and Dignity of the Human Person
2.       Community and the Common Good
3.       Rights and Responsibilities
4.       Option for the Poor
5.       Dignity of Work
6.       Solidarity and Subsidarity
7.       Care for God’s Creation

-          3 principles of Social Ethics
-          Nostra Aetate: dignity of human life, tolerance of other religions, “no person should be persecuted because of their faith”

1.       human dignity
2.       Pursuit of truth
3.       Comparative theology

-          Tolerance after Holocaust
-          4 issues for future of Christianity:

1.       Leadership
2.       Acceptance,
3.       Attrition
4.       Critical reflection

-          Eschatology: study of the end of history, Jesus second coming
-          Resurrection
-          Teleological: putting into perspective of the end
-          Semiotic: signs and symbols

Group 3: 

Terms
-Salvation
-Redemption
-Sin (Original, Social)
-Theological Anthropology
-Sempiternal creation
-Justice versus Mercy
-Social Justice
-Suffering
-Cuius regio eius religio principle
-Historiography
-Teleological Thinking
-Apocatastastis

Things
-Fallenness of humanity
-Fundamentals of Christian ethics
-Virtues
-Cardinal Virtues
-Theological Virtues
-Penitential Life
-Catholic Social Teachings
-Evolution of Tolerance
-Nostra Aetate
-Comparative Theology
-Eschatology

People
-Karl Popper and his 3 worlds
-Martin Luther
-John Calvin

Group 4: 

Virtue: theological virtues and cardinal virtues; and Morality: social vs. personal
Theological Anthropology- humanity as: creation of God, sempiternal creation,
defined as an embodied soul
Original Sin
Atonement- Jesus as perfect sacrifice; redemption; grace; restoration
Systemic/social sin
Justice vs. mercy
Sacrament
Deification
Social justice: rights and responsibilities, option for the poor, dignity of work,
solidarity and subsidiarity, care for God’s creation
Suffering and social ethics
Attrition
Purging
Christian Ethics
Eschatology
Teleological thinking
Semiotic thinking
Comparative theology
Christian concept of resurrection

Group 5: 

Sempiternal
Karl Popper
Fall of Humanity
Social Sin
Justice & Mercy

Point of Being Good
Redemption and Sacrifice
Christian Morality
Personal and Social Morality
Justice and Chastity
Premises based on God’s Wisdom, Humanity’s Fall, and Christ’s Saving Work
Habits of Mind
Habits of Action

Fundamentals of Christian Ethics (3)
Call to an ascetic and chaste life (monastic answer)
Suffering
Non-monastic and ascetic lifestyle
[4 principles of Christian Salvation]
Life, Justice, Truth

Social Justice
7 principles of catholic social teaching

Point to talking to other religions
Religious context of Christian orgins
Christianity as a minority religion
The Chrsitian Threat
The Christian Era
The Modern Era
Evolution of Tolerance

The Historical Impetus

Impact of Theology After Class

As many of us move through the rest of our college career, we may believe that our Theology class will not effect us the rest of the way of college.  From Aerospace Engineering to marketing to pre-med, Theology and all of the principles involved within Theology stay with us forever.  Many of the different major choices have direct correlations to the theology we are studying today.  In most science majors, such as Engineering or Medical professions, the issues of modern theology are very much present throughout the studies of these topics and after during careers.  As we have discussed in class about the impact of science on religion, theology takes a large part in the interpretation of much of the data.  Facts, as Dr. Ginther talked about, can be distorted to whatever way the interpreter wants them to be perceived, so in these positions reading of the data can be affected by the belief system of the person.  Also, as was mentioned in the class, there is a belief out in the world that because God created everything in the world, science and particularly research into science is a way of getting a deeper understanding of God's miraculous creation.  People, and I am one of these people, believe that because everything was created by God that science is a better way of understanding exactly how perfect God made everything in the world.  In regards to the medical profession, this belief in understanding God through knowing the body exists, but the morality intertwined with theology I believe is more prevalent within society.  This is seen not only in that medical professionals have to take ethics classes and give oaths to save lives before becoming a doctor, but in the issues that surround the profession today.  From contraception to stem cell research to abortion, science and the medical profession are at the forefront of using the theology of the day to make important ethical decisions regarding the health, legal, and moral consequences of actions.  Theology also relates to multiple business professions, because they are the people handling the money and trying to become wealthy.  Many of their decisions are ethically charged, as they are forced to take two years of theology and philosophy so they will have a strong moral background when they enter into the business world.  Jesus relates directly into this profession because although we prefer to live in comfort and wealth, Jesus wants us to live a simple lifestyle in an effort to give back to those less fortunate than ourselves.  From this, business majors take Jesus into their work so that they will give some of their money back, donate to charities, and help out those less fortunate, while having ethical business practices.  In all of these majors, and every other major that I did not cover in depth, we can see the impacts of Theology and specifically Theology 100 as we move not only through our educational process, but into our careers that lie ahead.

My View on the End of Time

After these past couple of classes about eschatology and the Second Coming, it got me to thinking about how I have interpreted what the end of time to be. To start, I would like to say that I highly doubt that the world is going in December of this year. The basis of this claim is just absurd in my opinion. Anyways, I like to think that this Second Coming will be less violent than what I feel like it came off to be. From what I was taught Jesus was a very loving and caring individual and it’s hard for me to believe that he would come back as a “Warrior Jesus.” It seems completely contradictory to his teachings and the perception of himself that he tried to put forward. I realize that he will probably be pissed by how screwed up the world is and all the bad things that happen, but I also think that because he lived among the destitute of society (lepers, tax collectors, poor and prostitutes) that he would definitely believe in second chances since that is what he tried to give those people. I think that society is inherently good, though due to the Original Sin we are flawed and sometimes don’t recognize the evil that we do. I mean God created us so he should know that we will have short comings and will falter at times and indulge in the pleasures of the flesh. Life isn’t easy and sometimes we need a physical escape from the harshness of the world and as much as a spiritual escape would be nice, it’s not something that we can feel and doesn’t always help us. With that said, I believe that it would be very unfortunate for God and Jesus to judge us on little personal flaws like this since we were created as imperfect creatures anyhow. To me it seems to be God setting us up for failure if this were how it’s going to be and maybe he isn’t as all-loving as we believe. I recognize that there is probably a view point that says God made us flawed to overcome those flaws to prove ourselves worthy to him, but even that seems like setting us up for failure because the Church seems to preach that no matter what we do, humanity is fallen. My view point is that people should live their lives in a good manner trying not to hurt one another and contribute to society in a positive manner. We should also realize that we are weak creatures and that indulging the pleasures of the flesh will happen and as long as we try to be better that should be enough for God and Jesus and the Final Judgment. From what I’ve been taught it just seems like if you weren’t as close to perfect in this life than you are going to be screwed for the next one. That just isn’t a basket I’d like to put all my eggs in.

Science vs. Religion

            Ilia Delio is a professor at Georgetown University.  She has obtained multiple degrees, one of which is in science, and the other degree has a focus on religion.  Therefore, it is of no surprise that she was asked to teach a course that studies the relationship between the two areas of discipline, or what society has taken upon itself to terming as, "Science vs. Religion".

            However, to her surprise, she was fairly ignorant in relation to how fast this relationship between the two disciplines had led to a widespread intense conversation, or for lack of a better word, debate, between people all over the world within the last several years. As a vast amount of literature and new articles are being published on the topic, Ilia wondered if she could fulfill the promise she made to providing her students with an openness to each area of study.  Eventually, out of this concern she began to wonder in an even broader question, if Catholic Universities were even capable of "fostering this dialogue" between the two areas of study.

            Ilia argues that with recent advances in technology and communication, it has led to a rapid spread of increased awareness within people that ultimately, has led to a discrepancy in opinions. Furthermore stating that, "with these changes have come new moral and religious questions and the Catholic Church needs theologians whom are willing to address them". 

            Now, because we have all taken Theological Foundations, we are aware that science is a critical tool for the "development of one's faith" and because of this, Ilia calls out the Catholic Church for its hesitance to accept recent scientific developments, and consequentially, refers to it as a slow-moving turtle.  Unfortunately, this notion of uncertainty and hesitance seems to be prevalent within many Catholic Universities, as well.  According to her argument, the majority of Catholic Universities seem to be dragging their feet when it comes to providing resources to educating their theologians that have an open mindset towards what she refers to as the, "scientific world".

            She further concludes that it is essential for Catholic Universities to step-up and become leaders in integrating science and religion.  However, despite the increasing amount of information on the Internet and expanding dialogue amongst Christians pertaining to this relationship, few universities have responded to its growth.  In fact, according to Ilia's argument, very few universities even offer a course to study the correlations between science and religion. 

            Now, at this point you are probably wondering if SLU offers any courses pertaining to this matter, well you're in luck, because it does.  I have listed below two courses, which SLU offers and that I believe would be worthwhile to anyone whom is having difficultly in finding a balance between science and religion.  The first course listed below deals specifically with this relationship, and the second course deals more with applying how we understand and view science today to what we consider to be traditional human values. 

            But, most importantly what I want to make notice of with this blog entry, is Ilia's call for leadership within the Catholic Church.  In class we talked about the future of Christianity and where it is headed in the upcoming years, and leadership was one of the key elements in question.  Ilia's argument goes directly to this question of leadership, in which she claims can be solved through educating theologians, which can foster a dialogue between science and religion. 

          Although, her solution may not be the answer to the "Science vs. Religion" debate, she makes an excellent point in noting the need for addressing these questions.  If the Catholic Church and its community continues to drag its feet in answering these questions, it will only continue to limit and prohibit further developing our understanding of faith, and what it means to be a Christian in the 21st century.   After all, change is the only constant... so, the scientists say.

Courses offered at SLU:

PHIL 360 Science and Religion
This course surveys the relationship between scientific and religious thought from the perspective of major developments in the history of science. Prerequisites: PHIL 105 and 205; 3.0 Credit hours

PHIL 365 Topics in Science, Technology, and Society
This class investigates issues and themes connected with the relationships between science, technology, and human values: e.g., the role of science and technology in society; technology and ethics; critical theory of technology; philosophy of engineering; artificial intelligence and human nature; and science as a social process. Prerequisites: PHIL 105 and 205. 3.0 Credit hours

 Link to Ilia's Argument

Anti-Islamic Groups

I was looking at the news and stumbled across an article about an anti-Muslim response to an alleged honor killing in Michigan. Though I don’t think that’s the right thing to do, I wanted to talk about the blatant racism towards Muslims that is occurring by these anti-Muslim groups. Pam Geller is at the forefront of this movement. She created the “Stop Islamization of America,” an organization that has been labeled a Muslim hate group and portrays all Muslims as radical terrorists. This woman claims that Islam teaches violence and that it is a threat to America. She claims to have read the Quran but from her arguments that I have seen, it seems that she probably hasn’t. She distorts the teachings into fitting whatever argument she has to promote a bad image of Muslims. The organization was made famous in 2010 with the mosque at Ground Zero controversy. Geller claimed that this place would be a birthplace for more terrorism and that it is a spit in the face to the victims of 9-11. This type of racism and discrimination towards religions, especially Islam, makes extremists groups hate America anymore. This lady is condemning a religion in America’s defense while stepping on the Constitution and the freedom of religion. It’s unfortunate to see this type of racism because this gives America a bad image in the eyes of people around the world and only feed the fire that fuels extremist groups. The fact that this lady is providing a “refuge from Islam” is just an absurd racist claim. She also has published articles defending Radovan Karadžic who has been indicted for genocide and war crimes against Bosnian Muslims. It’s also interesting to see the ignorance behind these arguments. Geller dismisses the idea the Muslim terrorists study a perverted form of Islam and believes that this violence is the foundation of the religion. Her blog is stirring up anti-Islam feelings throughout the country. I just wanted to bring stuff like this to people’s attention. It’s a shame that these people trying to suppress religion based on examples of one group of people while claiming to be protecting America when what they are doing is going against what this nation stands for.

Thoughts on Resurrection

On Friday in class, Dr. Ginther asked us our thoughts on resurrection. When almost no one raised their hands to comment on the question, I realized that I was not the only one who had probably never thought about it. The resurrection of Christ (and therefore Christians) is something that we have all been taught for most of our lives. Regardless of the arguments made for there being no resurrection, it is much of the basis of the Gospel.

In class we talked about no resurrection of Christ means no resurrection of Christians which means faith is futile. If faith is futile, then dead Christians are already lost. This is not a claim that I can easily accept. We spend all of our lives trying to live the "right way" so that we can go to Heaven when we die. So if there is no resurrection, what is the point in living well? Are we living well and doing the right thing simply for nothing? I think not.

There is an empty tomb that says there is a such thing as resurrection. All of our beliefs are somewhat surrounded by the idea of resurrection. It is what the Gospel is based on.

I realize that I am kind of speaking in circles, but I'm still having a hard time wrapping my head around the idea, and I'm really tired of typing the word "ressurection." So, please, feel free to comment. It's the last week of class, let's make it good!

Where Do We Go From Here? The Future of Christianity

http://landonwhitsitt.com/2012/02/23/what-i-dont-want-the-future-of-christianity-to-look-like/  

I thought this article was very interesting. The writer is talking about what he does not want Christianity to look like in 30-50 years.   Landon Whitsitt is a theologian that offered his opinions on current religion and the future.  The future of Christianity is up for debate, and it was fascinating to see what a theologian thought of Christianity in the future.

Regarding the leadership aspect of the future of Christianity, Whitsitt says that he is tired of men leading the church.  He would rather have women have (at least) a more important role in 30 years, as he feels having men in charge is not a good idea anymore.  He also wants to see women of color having church related jobs, as he feels colored women truly deserve it.  I think it is a bold move, as saying more colored women should have church related jobs could raise some eyebrows.  

Another important aspect he mentions is membership, which is similar to the concept of the acceptance of others.  Whitsitt believes church workers want more people in order to generate more cash.  However, he also claims that if people are going to go to church, they should be dedicated members.  This is much different than the “I’ll go once in awhile theory,” and he feels this will help build a stronger church.  By enforcing commitment, the church can benefit and become stronger and build a brighter future for Christianity.

The article was well thought and went into the mind of the inner theologian of Whitsitt.  It offered some interesting points, and we will have to see if much has changed for Christianity in the next 30-50 years.

Aftermath of the Holocaust

The other day we discussed Christian’s evolution of tolerance for other religions and how it had to change drastically over the 20^th century as the nations of the world began to globalize and atrocities against religions became exposed (mainly the Holocaust). I thought this was a really interesting discussion because I learned a few new things that I hadn’t been aware of. I thought it was really interesting that Dr. Ginther said something along the lines of Hitler also hating Christians (something I was not familiar with) as well as Jews, but most Germans were Christians. This intrigued me because I had never really put the slaughter of the Jews during the Holocaust at the hands of another religion, just blamed it more on Hitler and thought of it more as an ethical issue because of the Germans trying to make the Jews the scapegoat for their problems. But this apparently brought the anti-Semitism of Christians to the forefront of problems facing Catholic Europe. To me, this seemed like a huge turning point in the history of Christianity because they decided to do a complete 180 on how they treated other religions especially the Jewish community. I just thought this was a neat thing to learn because going to a public high school they tend to leave out religious aspects of history, other than a broad context of them. I had never learned of the religious impacts the Holocaust had on Christianity.

To go along with the impacts this had on Christian relations with other religions in the world, I thought the Nostra Aetate was a really interesting read. I had read it in a historical context rather than just reading it and was really intrigued by this as well. The document focused mainly on the religions that Christianity had been rubbing elbows with during the time in which it was written. It focused a lot on relations with Judaism for obvious reasons (the 1500 years or whatever of persecution that has occurred) and on the relations with Islam. There were conflicts between all the religions after WWII because of the creation of the state of Israel for a place for Judaism to flourish. As a history major I read a lot of primary sources to try and get a picture of the culture and for biases and what not, I hadn’t read any contemporary religious documents and this was an interesting change. 

Do we need the church?

http://www.stltoday.com/lifestyles/faith-and-values/civil-religion/travis-scholl/do-we-really-need-church/article_088e59d4-8181-11e1-a493-001a4bcf6878.html

When I came across this article, I was very interested in what the author had to say because lately I have been struggling with the church. Don’t get me wrong, I believe in God and all of the teachings in the Bible, but I have some issues with the way the church is structured. I was just expressing my concerns to my friend and she felt the same way as me. Sometimes I wonder why we should go to church. Why not just follow your beliefs instead?

     So when I came across this article, I was curious to see what the author’s argument would be. He believes that the church is important for us because of the community it provides. After I read this, I realized how true this was. It is the sense of support and communion with others that makes the church so important in our lives. It is where we can share our triumphs and failures. It is a place where people accept us for who we are, no matter what we have done in the past.

     There was an argument that the author made that really caught my attention. He observes that the “church was, is and never will be perfect”. This is such a simple point, but it something that I had not thought about. Of course the church is not perfect. It is an institution run by humans. We as humans are not even close to perfect, and therefore, all of our institutions, including the church are not perfect. The author furthers this point by saying, “we need the church to be what the church is for. And why we need it to be what it always has been: wandering, flailing about, desperate, and broken, and misguided. And yet, still bringing people together to search for the divine hidden in all this mess”. After I read this, I realized that the church was flawed, but it is a necessary for our spiritual growth. We need the support that the church provides.

End-Times Funny Business

This is a video clip from the Alex Jones Show.

He talks about end-time prophecies and explains how in the Bible (Mathew 24:36) it says that no man knows the day or hour that Christ will return.

He talks about how the idea of a pre-tribulation rapture is a new concept and not found in the bible.

He talks about how (Romans 13) “the state is established by the lord” is promoted by governments to quell dissent.

He explains the “Clergy Response Team” program where the Department of Homeland Security has over 100,000 preachers on their payroll to spy on the American people and tell them to submit to government, turn their guns in, and go to FEMA internment camps during a crisis.

Stephen Fry and the Church

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NL5WVecNdhk
              One thing that I found very interesting in class on Friday was the video on Stephen Fry and his take on the Catholic Church, and to relate it more to our class content, where as a church we are going from here. I found it funny and maybe a bit ironic that when Fry addressed religion in regards to the future and just the Catholic Church in general, he only really addressed, however negatively, Catholocism as a religion and the negative aspects of that. His view was, as many pointed out, what the Catholic church has not necessarily done and about what should be changed rather than what good things can be done and also what the church as a whole can do. As someone pointed out in class, the church is not just a hierarchy of malevolence in which only people higher up have a say in which to do, but many parts of the church consist of the poor, in fact the great majority of it does. The substance of a religion cannot only be made up of the people that seem to hold the power, but rather is greatly held by those that are of 'lower' position in the church, but whose positions are just as important. For instance, is it not the pope who goes out and serves the poor but rather many other people in the church that physically give time and money to help feed those in need, or help the widows and the orphans?
             Another point that I feel that Fry did not address was that the church is not just the Catholic Church, but can consist of other religions and people of nondenominational religions as well. As Luke stated in the book of Acts, chapter 2, talking about the fellowship of the believers (the early church, as we discussed at the beginning of the semester), "They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer...All the believers were together and had everything in common. They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need. Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts...praising God and enjoying the favor of all people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved." This was what the early church was made up of, of normal people sent to do the work of God, not even necessarily of the people in power at that time, like the Pharisees or the Sanhedrin. The early church was "enflamed" by the Holy Spriti, with a common worship and common belief, which is not always seen today. (Which would also definitely help in binding the church together more). So this to say that I feel like a point that was missed was that the church is not just made up of Catholicism, but of the body of believers, the body of Christ, and communing with each other for the work of God that comes along with it. So Fry can be a little disconcerted with the Catholic church, to say the least, but I don't think that he should forget that there are good things happening there, and that many other good things are happening elsewhere. His focus on attrition left out the fact that other leaders are being raised up for the future of Christianity, and as already said, good things are happening as well. As one last point, it would be hypocritical for me to say that Fry only focused on negative aspects of the Catholic church, and only pointing those out in his speech without saying that if he did have some truth to his message, then it would be important to take that into reflection and as criticism to change things for the better.

Holocaust Remembrance Day

Tonight I was talking to a friend of mine who just happens to be Jewish.  I called her to ask her about religious intolerance because that's what I was planning to blog about.  She immediately commented that it was coincidental of me to ask her about that today since it is Yom HaShoah, Holocaust Remembrance Day.  I must admit that I was unaware of a specific day that was set aside for a day to remember those who were killed and tortured under Hitler's regime.  Below is a link to a brief video that demonstrates the remembrance shared by the Jewish community.  The video does contain some disturbing images so please use discretion.

Video of YomHoShoah

At the very end of the video, it compares numbers of lives lost with the census of people living in cities and provinces.  It's horrifying to know that 11,000,000 deaths were the result of Anti-Semitism.  How does it come to this?  How does an opposing religious view turn into a massacre?  What is the reasoning behind the killing of others because of religion?  Do they kill because they believe others will be lead astray by what is, in their opinion, a "false doctrine"?  In other words, do they kill for the sake of their religion?  Or do they kill because they view themselves as the elect and see all other religious views are only held by infidels that do not matter?  In other words, do they kill for more power and domination in the world?  These questions may never be answered, but they do form the emergence of religious tolerance.

My friend described to me how important it is for the Jewish community to make a day of remembrance for what happened to them.  She told me that they sound off sirens and immediately, everyone stops what they are doing, stands to their feet, and remember.  She said that even if they are in a car driving, when they hear the siren they will pull over, step out of the car, stand, and remember.  Below is a picture of a rabbi blowing a shofar to sound the call to remembrance.










Tragedies such as the Holocaust have been seen before.  During the Crusades, many Christians attempted to convert the world to Christianity.  The question remains as to whether their pursuit was gold, glory, or God.  The truth of the matter is that there will always be religious diversity.  However, there will always be a few radicals in all religions that blemish the bunch.  For example, a Catholic priest who has been caught as a pedaphile does not indicate that all Catholics are pedaphiles.  A Protestant pro-life protestor that bombs an abortion clinic does not indicate that all Protestants are murderers for the sake of pro-life.  Religious intolerance is placing a stamp on a religion based on a few radicals that make major headlines.  These headlines breed hate and retaliation among religions.  There should be respect among all mankind regardless of faith.  We are all human and we are all seeking the truth.  It's okay to agree to disagree

So where do we go from here?  Is religious tolerance merely getting along or is it also remaining tight-lipped about your faith so as not to offend others?  It is agreed that we should all show respect to one another and that we should not form an opinion about a religion based on the few radicals that make the headlines, but what about our view of the truth?  Some religions believe that all roads lead to heaven.  Others believe that there is only one way to heaven and that is through Jesus Christ.  If it is true that Jesus is the only way to heaven, am I truly embracing my brother who believes in another path to heaven by not sharing my truth?  Thus arises the dilemma of whether or not sharing one's faith is considered religious intolerance.  You can love your brothers of different faith, but shouldn't you at least show them your truth - especially if you believe it is the only way to heaven.  It seems the push for tolerance is not only being respectful (which should always be practiced), but also keeping your own beliefs silent.  This is the point to which I believe an error in judgment has occurred.  I think it is critical to share our truths while being respectful, as long as it is done with a loving heart and not a condemning spirit.  As brothers and sisters, we want the best for each other and that wish remains regardless of religious choice.  Once again, I will stress one of my favorite things:  balance.  There is a stability needed between the freedom to share our views and the respect to be given to those of other religious beliefs.********************

After speaking with my Jewish friend, I was left feeling the burden of what the brothers and sisters of her faith endured.  I found myself stopping for a moment to remember the great loss of life that resulted from religious intolerance.  I was pleased, however, to know that she expresses no hate toward those who have so wronged the Jewish community.  Rather, she's open to hearing and discussing other faiths, as long as it is conducted in a respectful manner.  I would expect nothing less.  I am a Christian, she is a Jew, and we are very good friends.  We disagree in our beliefs, we share our beliefs, but we also have respect for each other.  These three things make up religious diversity and tolerance.