Jewish lawmakers threaten walk-out over reference to Jesus

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | April 3, 2003 | Diana Lynne

[TopQuark]

Firstly, I apologize: I meant to refer to #431.

Secondly, the issue is not your beliefs, unless sharing a meal with a non-believer in Christ is a violation of your faith.

Thridly, trere are thousands of chaplian, priest, ministers, and rabbies that routinely officiate at inter-religious ceremonies. No problem ever arises on Capitiol HIll when the Chaplain leads in a prayer there.

All these people are Christian, educated, and even ordained. None of them betrays Christianity.

It's not about one's beliefs: it's about tact and unity.

[nanny]

LOL! Never thought I'd see that written on a conservative board.

There are a lot of things posted here I never thought I would see on any American posting board - certainly not a so-called conservative or Republican site.

If you haven't noticed, Christianity is under fire - big time. It is being helped along by the so-called conservative movement and even our PResident sided with the Muslim in a religious debate.

[Hacksaw]

You and your type will have none of it, because it IS a matter of religion to you. This Confederacy-that-never-was is a false god.

That sounds like a Wlat-ism. It was, it existed, and the heritage is still celebrated. Just recently, political groups like the NAACP decided that it was much easier to attack Southern Heritage as racist than actually do anything for the people they claim to speak for. Some of the politically correct on this forum have allied themselves with this revision.

[k2blader]

It is possible to give an "ecumenical prayer" which will be satisfactory to all concerned.

Are there Maryland Senate rules on the books outlining standards for "ecumenical prayer"?

I'm sure he knows this.

I'm sure Rev. Hughes knows all he wanted to do was praise his Savior.

Failure to do so is an unnecessary provocation on his part.

Doubtless the utterance of the word "Jesus" is provocative to some.

And it is one more brick in the wall toward the day when such prayers will not be allowed at all. I would rather have them, than nothing at all.

Thanks to folks like Sens. Ida Ruben and Gloria Hollinger, yes.

It's too bad that "compromise" isn't possible with some who think this way.

You are correct. "Compromise" isn't acceptable here. A professed, committed believer agreeing to strike "In Jesus' name" from the end of a prayer would be akin to him saying "I reject you, Lord," which, if the profession and commitment are true, would never happen.

[Hacksaw]

It was just needlessly provocative, and the minister owes an apology.

You can post that 100 times, but it is still PC BS.

[DannyTN]

They didn't hide the name of Jesus Christ when the country was founded and they shouldn't hide it now.

Congressional Day of Fasting 1776. Notice it calls for meditation on Jesus Christ.

http://lcweb.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/f0404s.jpg

The Jews in this case are intolerant. But certainly shouldn't be required to sit through a prayer they find offensive. I wouldn't sit through a Muslim's prayer, but I support their free excercise of their religion. I wouldn't sit through a Satanist's prayer, but again I support their right.

[k2blader]

Thank you. That was my general understanding.

But for lack of a better way of putting it, I was wondering if there's more to it than that.

Aruanan's comment that he/she "was raised from earliest childhood to be an ardent Zionist" especially caught my attention.

[carton253]

I think Aruanan was saying that he/she was raised to support Israel's right to exist as a country. I consider myself a Zionist... a rather passionate one.

[aruanan]

Would you please define "Zionist" for me? I see/hear that word and confess I'm not sure what it means.

Well, Zionism Plus. Not only did we believe that the Jews maintain a right to their homeland (after all, they had been continuously living there since Rome, Persia, the Black Death, and the Muslim hordes screwed them over throughout the first 8 centuries AD), we believed that the re-establishment of the modern state of Israel was a fulfillment of prophecy. Some folks said that the re-establishment of an official Israeli government and nation wouldn't be legitimate by secular means but would have to be done by the Messiah. We figured that the same G-d who used secular means to chastise Israel according to covenant and to return her to the land after the Babylonian captivity could use secular means to re-establish the modern state.

[Zionist Conspirator]

Did I flag everybody?

::Sigh:: It's always sumpn'.

As a Noachide I grow extremely tired of the replaying of the same old song over and over again--Jews representing "freedom of conscience" and chr*stians representing objective religious truth that transcends all other concerns. Maybe it's time that Jews cut the "pluarsims" crap and started speaking the language of religious objectivity?

I am a non-Jew who believes that the Torah is the Absolute Objective Truth. Where do I fit in in this little dialogue? Nowhere apparently. I believe praying to J*sus or anyone else other than to the True G-d is wrong--not in a sense of insensitivity, but an act of idolatry. But is anyone going to inject that position? No. It's always liberal Jews vs. pious chr*stians. Judaism always gets cast in the role of the advocate of religious subjectivism while chr*stianity represents simple truth. What a chillul HaShem.

Because of the very nature of religion no sincere chr*stian, however pro-Jewish, can in good conscience not pray to the Nazarene. It doesn't matter how politically incorrect it is or how much trouble it causes, they must put their religion first just as everyone must. I don't defend idolatrous prayer, but I do understand that the "pluralism argument" is sheer poppycock, however embedded it is in our American (enlightenment/Jeffersonian) consciousness.

Instead of demanding that chr*stians stop praying to J*sus in the name of "tolerance" and "pluarlism" (which two things are totally irrelevant anyway), why not tell them the Truth--that J*sus isn't G-d and that it is forbidden to pray to him or to any other entity other than HaShem? I realize Jews haven't been in a position to do this for most of two millenia, but that is no excuse in this day and age.

I will gladly support Theocratic legislation against praying to J*sus. However, anti-J*sus legislation based on the theory that J*sus represents the "reactionary" concept of Objective Religious Truth (and the concomitant implication that Judaism is opposed to Objective Religious Truth) is absolutely blasphemous. Once again Jews are cast in the role of opposition, not to false religion, but to religion per se. How tiresome this grows.

I wish some of you on the two conventional sides of this issue would put yourselves for just a moment in the shoes of a Noachide. If you're really that "tolerant" it shouldn't be that hard for you!

[jonatron]

It just seems that if the prayer had been given in God's name all would have been well, and all would have been content.

Amen!

[k2blader]

Thanks again.

I also strongly support Israel's right to exist as a country.

If that's all that defines a Zionist, it seems I'm one too. :-)

[sauropod]

You sir, are misled.

Jesus is LORD and part of the Trinity. The Old Testament and the New Testament are not two separate books but parts of the same organism.

I reject your argument entirely.

[saradippity]

I have looked,and what I said is what I think after reading as much as I could absorb. I wasn't challenging the sauropod,I asked if s/he had any other thoughts on it,and implicit,if s/he agreed with me. Depending on the answer I might ask more questions. I think people need to think about what and who we are talking about when we discuss the Bible and God and related matters.

BTW I recommend you read a book called "How To Win Friends And Influence People",you'll find the information he offers much more valuable if you dedicate some time to digging into it. I think it will help you immeasureably more than my advice which would be,"stop stop patronizing me".

[Captain Beyond]

If it is not about belief then why pray at all? You have just reduced God to nothing more than a formality. Why not just ask guidance and blessing from the American Idol or Donny Osmond. It would make as much sense as what you are saying about prayer. Jesus is the way to the Father. Jesus' sacrifice was so all people could be forgiven of sin and be able to stand before GOD. Do you really think Jesus sacrificed his life so that we could pray in unity and with tact?

[Beacon Falls]

Ahh yes, Thor. Thank you for the knowledge, that is after all what we all need, no?

[saradippity]

Wow,the Lord's Prayer,vain repetition? No wonder I have so much trouble understanding some people on this thread,who seem to have spent considerable time studying something.

I was happy to see that you did close with acknowledging that it was the way you felt about it. That you recognize that,is good.

[Illbay]

You have every right to reject his argument "entirely" (or even partially).

What you don't have is the "right" to publicly offend when there is no reason on earth why such offense should be given.