Holidays
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Re: Ummm...happy holidays? Whatever happened to that?
I am always SHOCKED at how much historical ignorance about US history there is.
No. We were not founded as a Christian nation. Seriously. Many of our forefathers were atheists themselves. Many of the "under god" things were added in the 1950s and 1970/1980s during certain movements.
But the idea that we were founded as a christian nation makes me LOL everytime.
This is an extremely ignorant comment. None of these phrases = Christian.
This sort of reminds me of the coworker of my mother's who, in a horrified voice and face said, "You believe in Allah???!!!??" Ok, ignorant people, there is One God (in Christian/Muslim/Jewish faiths). Why is that so difficult to understand? It isn't a "different" God.
To OP, the work thing is weird. I would have shot an email to HR about that but I would have still attended the party.
I am Muslim. This is a much more difficult identity to deal with in the US than your Jewish background so maybe I "understand". Because I am white and dress in modern western clothing, people never know.
Eid moves each year according to the Lunar Calendar so "Happy Holidays" only included me twice that I can remember. All other times, any seasonal phrase means 0 to me. I always thought "happy holidays" was a pretty stupid comment because if it is December 25th, and someone says "happy holidays," we both know what the other person REALLY means. I'm happy for those people who celebrate and say "same to you" in response. I just don't see what the BIG DEAL is since they mean well.
By your logic, since I don't celebrate anything during December, no one should wish me Happy Holidays at all. I should be offended that anyone would think of saying "Happy holidays" to me.
THANK YOU, zitiqueen.
Are you saying what I believe to be a false God, Allah, is the same as Jesus Christ? Surely not!
Wow, OK, where to start...
First, you're entited to your beliefs BUT I didn't come on here calling your beliefs "false." I would appreciate the same respect from you.
Second, the word Allah means "The God." Even if you are Christian, and speak Arabic (Yes, they exist), you would use that term. Allah = God/The Father. Jesus does appear in the Koran, but as a highly regarded prophet, not God/The son. This is the best I can explain it since there is no Trinity in Islam. Just "The God" as there is in Judaism.
I'm going to stop with the religious talk right here because this is not the place to discuss it. I just hope that you take the time out of your day to learn about other cultures & faiths. I personally find that learning about other faiths helps me to learn & understand more about my own.
I had to research different cultures and beliefs, such as Islam, in high school Bible class. We referred to such beliefs as religious cults.
We will agree to disagree.
I would reply with "Happy Hanukkah!"
People say all kinds of unknowlingly stupid stuff, when people say things to me that are well intentioned, yet moderately offensive to me personally, I try to remember their intent behind the words.
I changed my name
Wow, somebody is sounding ignorant and assy here, and it isn't the OP's coworkers.
I think you're confusing Muhammad with Allah. Islam, Judaism, and Christianity all believe in the same God (which, as PP stated, is Allah in Arabic). Here's how they relate:
Judaism: Jews do not believe in the prophets after the Jewish prophets, including Jesus and Muhammad. Therefore, they do not subscribe to the idea that Jesus was the Messiah and the son of God, nor do they believe in the teachings of Islam.
Christianity: Although Christianity developed out of Judaic texts, Christians do not follow Jewish law. Instead, they believe that the ritualistic Jewish law was abrogated in favor of a universal gospel for all of humanity and the Christian teaching, "Love thy neighbor as thyself."
Relationships between Jewish and Christian communities have often been difficult, particularly in Christian Europe. There, Jewish communities were often subject to discrimination and violence at the hands of Christians.
Christianity has also had a problematic relationship with Islam. Christians do not accept Muhammad as a prophet. While many Christians in the Middle East converted to Islam during and after the seventh century, the Church hierarchy in Rome and Constantinople considered Islam to be both a political and theological threat. The Crusades were an unsuccessful attempt to reverse the Islamic conquest of the eastern Mediterranean and the holy places of all three monotheistic religions.
Islam: Islam sees Judaism and Christianity as earlier versions of Islam, revelations given within the same tradition by Allah but misunderstood over time by their followers. Muslims see Islam as the final, complete, and correct revelation in the monotheistic tradition of the three faiths.
The Islamic tradition recognizes many of the Jewish and Christian prophets, including Abraham, Moses, and Jesus (although he is not considered to be the son of God). Many non-Muslims mistakenly believe that Muhammad is the equivalent of Jesus in the Islamic tradition; in fact, it is the Quran that stands in the same central position in Islam as Jesus does in Christianity. Muhammad himself is not divine, but a prophet chosen by God to deliver his message and an example of piety to emulate.
Jews and Christians are specifically protected in the Quran as Peoples of the Book, reinforcing their spiritual connection to Islam by virtue of having been given revelations from God. The Islamic legal tradition has upheld the rights of Jews and Christians to maintain their beliefs and practices within their communities in Islamic lands, and this policy of tolerance has generally been upheld.
From http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/globalconnections/mideast/themes/religion/index.html. Lots of good links at the bottom of the article for further reading, too.
You make my head hurt. No, seriously, I have a headache after reading all of your posts.
Did you even bother to read the case you're citing? Do you even know what the case was about? There are actually NO references in that case that "prove" America was founded as a Christian nation. There are lots of references to the fact that English colonist believed in A god, that our founding fathers believed in a creator, that Christianity has always been a part of the culture of certain states, and two references that Christianity is a pervasive part of American culture, but NOTHING in there that indicates that America was founded as a Christian nation.
You know what else is in there? Cites to laws (in approving tones) that prohibit atheists from holding public office. Yes, this is an EXCELLENT case to cite to.
Do some original research before you start spouting off crap you find on religious websites.
I'm always astounded by (a) the lack of knowledge about American history a lot of people have, (b) the ease with which people throw out "facts" without researching them, and (c) the lengths some religious people (note that I did not say all religious people) will go to to purposefully denigrate or ignore other religions in order to make themselves feel better about their own faith. The recognition of another religion (or no religion at all) shouldn't have any impact whatsoever on YOUR faith. If you need someone to tell you Merry/Happy X instead of a general "Happy Holidays" to affirm your faith, or if you insist on telling people Merry/Happy whatever holiday YOUR faith celebrates to someone you know is of a different faith in order to affirm YOUR faith, you have issues.
Very well put.
I didn't know many of the founders were atheists - would you mind citing a few - I'd like to read-up on them - you learn something new everyday. I've read quite a few biographies and never came across this - go figure!
"First, the Koran stresses that Allah is one person only: "They are unbelievers who say, ?God is the Third of Three.? No god is there but one God. The Bible unmistakably tells us that God has revealed Himself as a triune Being, as One God eternally existing in three Persons?Father, Son and Holy Spirit (Mt. 28:19; Jn. 1:1,14; Acts 5:3-4).5 Although many Muslims believe otherwise, Christians do not believe in three gods. This idea is a clear misrepresentation of Christian belief. Christians are not polytheists, who accept three gods, but monotheists who believe in one God.
Second, the Muslim God has a different character than the biblical God. It is significant that of the "99 beautiful names for Allah," which Muslims memorize and use for worship, not one of these names is "love" or "loving." The Koran stresses that Allah only "loves" those who do good, but that he does not love those who are bad. Allah himself emphasizes that he does not love the sinner. Thus, the love of Allah is not the love of the God of the Bible. The biblical God does love the sinner?in fact, He loves all sinner. God does not love the sin; but He does love the sinner.
Allah is considered the direct author of both good and evil. This is not the God of the Bible. While the biblical God is sovereign and permits evil, He is not its direct cause. Even when it is part of His plan, He frequently turns it to a higher good, as seen in the death of Jesus for our sins."
http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/islam/IS0403W1.htm
http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/archives-is.htmLots of good links for further reading, too.
Citing to a Christian minister's website to prove your point about Christianity is perhaps not the best way to show that you're conducting an impartial investigation into the issue.
This statement seems to imply that you don't really understand what the word "moot" means...
It's also pretty clear that you did NOT read the case in it's entirety, or if you did completely, either accidentally or willfully, misunderstood the references. Again, there are NO cites in that case which "prove" that America was founded as a Christian nation.
And again, citing to exclusively Christian sources to prove your statements about Christianity would also imply that you don't understand how bias works. Maybe try expanding your research horizons to include a few more impartial sources - it would make your argument(s) much more persuasive.
From earlyamericanhistory.net
The Revolution of Belief
Founding Fathers, Deists, Orthodox Christians, and the Spiritual Context of 18th Century America
? 2007, by Jim Peterson
Introduction
Given what we currently know, all of the first five presidents and most, if not all, of the Founding Fathers believed in God. Atheism was mostly unknown among the writers of Constitution and was very rare among those of European descent in the 18th- Century. However, it is not always easy to ascribe a particular denomination to an individual. Because of the rural nature of early America, many in colonial times chose churches based on convenience. Where they went to church regularly may not be a perfect indicator of what faith they considered themselves. Thomas Jefferson, for example, was raised Episcopalian, donated a significant amount of money to building Episcopalian churches, attended a Episcopalian church, and yet is not considered an orthodox Episcopalian by any historian of note. His views would be considered heretical by today's orthodox standards.
Further complicating the religious beliefs of the Founding Fathers is the fact that, like a lot of us, their views changed over time. Both Jefferson and Franklin, for example, became slightly more orthodox in their beliefs during the last decades of their lives (although this was more a matter of degree than substance).
During the colonial period, there was a lot of gray area among believers. Issues of theology and eschatology were more carefully categorized and picked over by the educated classes in the 1700's than they are today. Yet at the same time, Enlightenment thinking allowed for liberal interpretations of religious doctrine. Most of the new emerging denominations were still considered Christian as long as one followed the teachings of Christ.
Since there was no national church in America, the 18th century religious culture operated regionally and locally. Individual religious beliefs also seemed to be going through a creative transformation, especially during the Great Awakening of 1730-50 (scholars do not always agree on an end date). What few people today seem to realize is that real definitions of orthodoxy don't easily apply to the American generations of people born during the 18th century. Protestantism had not matured to its current state, and the Age of Enlightenment was introducing new theological concepts based on reason over scripture. Individuals and Institutions were both in an active state of process.
Because of the changing times and the enthusiasm with which all religions began to operate in the New World, many spiritual ideas were exchanged with letters. Some of the Founding Fathers were more expressive than others, but our religious "pigeon-holing" relies heavily on their letters for our historical understanding.
Defining the Belief Systems
Separating Deists and Unitarians from Orthodox Christian Beliefs
Deist-Unitarian
Deism and Unitarianism are really apples and oranges in one important sense. Unitarians are a recognized national religious group with a church and ministers. Deism is not a religion. It is more of a religious viewpoint mostly relegated to 18th century philosophical thought. Nevertheless, I still feel inclined to separate these two from the orthodox religious groups that surrounded them - perhaps because many of the Founding Fathers defined themselves with such terms. The commonalities of Deism and Unitarianism were vividly expressed in an exchange of several letters by Jefferson and Adams after both had retired from public office. Both schools of thought were anchored in reason and had significant differences from the CalvinistProtestant and Anglican orthodoxy of the time period.
However, it should be noted that many Unitarians had specific problems with Deism, as was the case with John Adams and Benjamin Franklin. Adams thought Franklin's Deist ideas were far too liberal for his tastes. However, neither the Deist nor Unitarian belief systems fit particularly well into orthodox beliefs governing Anglicans or Calvinists because of their anti-Trinitarian position (see definitions below). Because of this rather bold line, I have separated these two from the Protestant mainstream religions.
It was possible to be "Deistic" in principle and still be "church-Protestant". George Washington and Thomas Jefferson have been claimed him as both Deist and Anglican at different times by historians, but this open attitude is largely a reflection of the liberal ideas marking Enlightenment thinking. A perfect religious "package" was not demanded of public officials. Generally, though, there is a faith-based and even dogmatic structure dividing the DeistUnitarians and all other groups such as Anglicans, Puritans, and Roman Catholics. John Adams is the only one of the first five presidents that appears to be a professed Unitarian in the classic sense and whose writings fully support that claim. Other Founding Fathers can be harder to read and have a tendency to blend beliefs.
Deism - Deism has no church and no official organization, hence, it is not considered a religion. It is more a reason-based view of religion in general. Deism is sometimes referred to as a religious philosophy or a religious outlook. In general, Deism did not see Christ as the Son of God, did not believe in the Trinity, had no strong belief in miracles, and had no belief in atonement or resurrection. The Bible was not considered ?sacred text? among most Deists, although most Deists were (like Franklin) Christian-friendly.
Deism could fall into certain subcategories of Deist-Christian (i.e. Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson) and Deist non-Christian (i.e. Thomas Paine, Ethan Allen). Deist-Christians generally believed the Bible provided good lessons to live by and they attended church regularly. Deist non-Christians generally felt that Christianity was largely an impediment to growth and they did not attend church regularly.
Unitarianism - In the 1700's, Unitarianism was an official recognized American religion. As a general rule, early American Unitarianism did not believe in the Trinity, believed the Christ was subordinate to God, and that salvation was largely through character. However, unlike Deists, Unitarianism might very well see Jesus as God?s messenger, and believe in the resurrection as well as the miracles reported in the New Testament. By the same token, reason and inquiry were highly esteemed - to the point where those features might supersede biblical teachings.
Unitarianism was vastly different than any of the major religions practicing at that time due to the fact that it valued human reason so highly, even at the expense of Biblical authority, and because it had no belief in the Trinity. This religion had its coming-out party during the 18th-century Age of Enlightenment, and indeed, one-hundred fifty years earlier it would have likely had to operate under cover and under threat of persecution. John Adams was a Unitarian and Thomas Jefferson, although not an official Unitarian, believed it to be the best of the organized religions.
Fitting the Deists and Unitarians into ideal separate definitions is not always a simple task since individual writings don?t always make for a convenient 21st century understanding.
Orthodox
Anglicans (Church of England and after the war, referred to as Episcopalian). The Church of England sprung from the English Reformation in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Like Roman Catholicism, it kept its hierarchy of bishops and priests, but like Calvinism it held that the Holy Scripture was the final authority on spiritual matters, not popes or any clergy. Anglicans also believed that the church could err in its teachings (also unlike Roman Catholicism). It was considered a middle way between Roman Catholicism and Reformed Churches.
Anglicans were a major force in parts of New York, Pennsylvania, the mid-Atlantic states and in the southern states, especially Virginia. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and James Monroe were all raised Anglican.
Calvinists - The Calvinists included Puritans, Presbyterians, Baptists, Congregationalists and other reformed churches. Essentially, Calvinists did not believe that true Christianity should retain a pope or official bishops. Pastors could serve in the capacity of minor church authorities. The also believed that salvation was entirely through God and that humans were sinners and that there was nothing they could do to change that.
Much of New England was Calvinist in some capacity throughout the 18th-Century. Most of the colleges around 1770 were Calvinist-influenced institutions. Benjamin Franklin and John Adams grew up in Calvinist homes although both would renounce that form of Christianity in later years (Franklin by the age of 15, and Adams as an adult). Holmes p 12-37. Samuel Adams, on the other hand, remained a practicing Calvinist all his life.
Roman Catholics were a distinct minority in mid 1700's and most could be found in eastern Maryland and Pennsylvania. Most were land-owners.
A variety of smaller Christian sects made up a large portion of the U.S. population in the 18th Century. These included Quakers (possibly 1/5 of the population early in the century), Mennonites, Shakers, and a variety of smaller sects that had been persecuted in Europe.
There were regional issues among these religions. One can make the rather broad observation that most Congregationalist Calvinists resided in New England and the Anglicans were more commonly found farther south. Deism and Unitarianism were not as regionally local although Deism had more strength in the mid-Atlantic states. Each state was slightly unique in its dominant religious orientation. Prior to independence, a variety of state laws were implemented with the majority state religion in mind.
Deist-Orthodox Charts
The chart below explores the differences between orthodox Christian action and beliefs and Deist actions and beliefs as it specifically deals with eight of the Founding Fathers.
I chose to look at the years from around 1770 to 1800 as the defining years to establish the particular belief set up in these charts. A couple of these men had a change of heart from earlier years, and a few have been rumored to have yielded to more traditional feelings of religion very late in life.
The Chart Categories
Much of what is inferred about the founding fathers and their religious beliefs cannot always be taken from their letters. There are other ways above and beyond their letters that I have outlined in their church actions. Again, this informational content comes from the book, ?Faiths of the Founding Fathers? by David Holmes, although these tables are entirely my creation.
From their actions, the following ideas are considered indicators of Christian orthodoxy, Deism, or some combination of both:
U.S. Presidents
Actions: Communion, Confirmation, Church Attendance, Vocabulary
Communion
Confirmation
Attendance
Vocabulary
Washington
No
No
Yes
Mostly Deist
Adams, John
not applicable
not applicable
Yes
Both
Jefferson
No
No
Yes
Deist
Madison
No
No
Yes
Deist
Monroe
No
No
Yes
Mostly Deist
Franklin
No
No
Yes
Deist
Paine, Thomas
No
No
No
Deist
Adams, Samuel
not applicable
not applicable
Yes
Orthodox
Beliefs: Resurrection, Christ-Divinity, Trinity, Miracles
Resurrection
Christ-Divinity
Trinity
Miracles
Washington
?
?
?
?
Adams, John
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Jefferson
No
No
No
No
Madison
?
?
No
?
Monroe
?
?
?
?
Franklin
No
No
No
?
Paine, Thomas
No
No
No
No
Adams, Samuel
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Ayn Rand Center cites Constitution and Declaration as well as quotes from founding fathers
http://www.aynrand.org/site/News2?id=6177
Judaism recognize Jesus as a good teacher or a prophet of God. They do not believe Jesus was the Messiah or God in the flesh.
The Jewish people had to reject him and crucify him on the cross, for all of our sins. If the Jewish people would have accepted Jesus as the Messiah, He never would have died on the cross for all of our sins.
Is this in response to my post?
Even within the Christian faith, there are different understandings of the trinity. I take it you believe that any belief system that doesn't recognize the trinity doesn't recognize the same God Christians do. I disagree. I believe that you can worship God the Father without worshiping the Son. You aren't Christian, because you don't follow Christ's teachings (or at least, not the teaching that he is son of God and the only way to salvation), but you do believe in the same God.
Based on my interpretation of the scriptures, I would never suggest that the Christian God is not the Jewish God. The God of which Jesus speaks IS the Jewish God. Jesus was a Jew, and Christianity grew out of the Jewish faith. We learn more about His nature in the New Testament, namely, his grace and forgiveness, but it is another side of the same being. I don't know enough about Islam to have a strong opinion, but it was always my understanding that Muslims worshiped the same God too.
I'm honestly sort of thrown for a loop here. I've never met another Christian who (openly, at least) believed that the God of the Jews wasn't the God of the Christians. And I've been involved in several, very different denominations - Episcopal, Fundamental Baptist, Evangelical.
More or less, but we don't view Jesus as a prophet.
Um...this is just BSC. I'm a Jew (and a fairly observant one at that) and this is the same kind of sh!t that gets used against us all.the.time. Jews did not kill Jesus of Nazareth. Jews did not categorically reject him. Get this? Jesus' Jewish contemporaries were historically just not that in to him. Do you know how many meshuge people claimed to be the messiah? Many! Give us some credit it dude. Jesus' death was political, not theological, but it makes a good story.
The Jews would never have and will never accept Jesus as the christos because Jesus did not fulfill the requirements, according to Judaism, to be the Messiah. Jesus himself probably would have pulled a "whaaaa?" to all this crap anyway.
So Ms_Matched, please stop. You are ignorant and uneducated about Judaism and I find your theological ramblings to be insulting to my religion and culture.
They may not tell you on your Christian websites, and God forbid you go to a Muslim website (I mean, gee, your computer would probably be struck with a bolt of lightning), but Jesus Christ is believed to have been a prophet (though not God Himself) by Muslims. They called Him 'Issa.
You could benefit from a more balanced education of other religions, it seems.
Well now my religion is being insulted.
I take back the word "crap", though. That was insulting as another person's religious beliefs are not crap. I am sorry for that.
As for his death, historically, politics were very much involved. The historical accounts of the political climate around the time of Jesus' death tend to show that the reason for his death was indeed political.
This does not make his death any less significant to Christians (seeing as how His death is the entire basis for the religion anyway.) The theological Jesus is as plausible as any other religious deity.
But Jesus was Jewish. He would not have believed in an incarnate god as this is anathema to Judaism. Why would a devout and radical Jew (he was challenging the current status quo of the Jewish people at the time) believe that he himself was God incarnate if such a belief was to completely go against his very religious nature?
Theological Jesus =/= Historical Jesus. Jews only believe in the Historical Jesus, therefore it would make more sense to me, a Jew, that Jesus would be baffled by the idea that he believe and declared himself to be the Messiah.
I added the smiley not to make everything ok. I don't think I said anything offensive. I was just saying "Hey, lighten up." Then I genuinely wished the op a Happy Holidays. I don't think there is anything not totally cool with that
I don't think that He would have been baffled by the idea that He was the Messiah, but you're entitled to think that.Just as you can think I'm incorrect.
What I do think He would've been baffled by is the idea that we all know best. I think He would be baffled by the hatred and even just the general discomfort that people cause allegedly in His name.
And I'm a fairly religious Christian. 'Let not those who look for thee be turned away by me.' I never would want to turn people off to Christianity through sanctimony.
Different strokes for different folks.