← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Centinel
Thread ID: 9206 | Posts: 11 | Started: 2003-08-22
2003-08-22 10:52 | User Profile
From CNSNews.com, available online at: [url=http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=\Culture\archive\200308\CUL20030822a.html]http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Pag...L20030822a.html[/url]
Christian Churches Should Stop Using the Cross, Group Says
By Jeff Johnson CNSNews.com Congressional Bureau Chief August 22, 2003
Capitol Hill (CNSNews.com) - An interfaith group founded by Unification Church leader Sun Myung Moon is spearheading an effort to have Christian ministers remove crosses from their churches, calling them a symbol of oppression and perceived superiority. Mainstream Christian leaders call the request "outrageously bigoted."
The American Clergy Leadership Conference (ACLC), an organization that began as a project of Moon's Family Federation for World Peace and Unification (FFWPU), believes the key to "true and lasting peace in the Middle East" is reconciliation between members of the world's three largest religions.
"Jews, Christians and Muslims must come together to heal divisions of the past, to stand together in a moment of repentance and reconciliation, and thus, tear down the walls that separate us as people of faith," said Archbishop George Augustus Stallings, Jr., of the independent Imani Temple African American Catholic congregation in Washington, D.C.
The ACLC held a symposium in New York Thursday on Jewish-Christian-Muslim reconciliation and Middle East peace entitled "Harmony Amongst the Children of Abraham." Stallings, who serves as national chairman of the executive committee of the ACLC, told CNSNews.com by telephone that part of that reconciliation involves assessing how Christian traditions are perceived by people of other faiths.
"We have realized that, as expressions of faith, there are certain symbols that have stood in the way," Stallings said. "The cross has served as a barrier in bringing about a true spirit of reconciliation between Jews and also between Muslims and Christians, and thus, we have sought to remove the cross from our Christian churches across America as a sign of our willingness to remove any barrier that stands in the way of us coming together as people of faith."
Michael Schwartz of Concerned Women for America - a biblically based, public policy women's organization - was shocked at Stallings' assessment.
"If a Christian objected to a Star of David or a Crescent, we would know that person is a bigot. When a Jew or Muslim objects to the display of the cross by Christians, we know the same thing about that person," Schwartz said. "To tear down our religious symbols, to uproot our traditions is not the way to reconciliation, but rather, to recognize with respect, our own and the traditions of others is the way to true reconciliation.
"Just imagine if some misguided Christian were to suggest that the Jews have to take away their symbol and the Muslims would have to take away their symbol, not display it in public any longer," Schwartz continued. "That would be identified instantly as a statement of intolerance. Reconciliation and peace do not grow out of intolerance."
Cross is symbol of 'religious intolerance, forced conversions...racism'
Stallings acknowledges that the cross is central to teaching people about the saving grace offered through Christ's death and resurrection but, he argued, Christians have also used the cross to send other messages.
"We have held up this cross in the face of Jews to say, 'If it had not been for your rejection of Jesus, our Messiah would never have been crucified," Stallings added. "We also know that the cross has stood as a barrier in Christian-Muslim relationships because we have held up our cross as a superior faith, that we - as Christians - are superior over the Muslims."
Stallings added that "a history of religious intolerance, forced conversions, inquisitions and even racism as used by white supremacists" also follows the cross through Christian history.
"The cross does not, by any means, symbolize a 'history of religious intolerance, forced conversions, inquisitions or racism,'" Schwartz responded tersely. "That is an outrageously bigoted statement."
Rev. Phillip Schanker, vice president of the FFWPU, said getting Christian pastors to remove the cross from their churches involves more than just taking down a symbol.
"There are divergent theological understandings centered around the cross," Schanker said. "So, it's not just the symbol we're dealing with."
While Christians may view the cross as the symbol of Christ's sacrificial death to pay for their sins, Schanker agreed with Stallings that Jews and Muslims have different perceptions. Jewish tradition does not recognize Christ as the savior, and Islamic teachings deny that it was Jesus who was crucified.
Christians, Schanker said, need to consider those disparate beliefs and ask themselves if the symbolism of the cross is worth maintaining the divisions it allegedly creates.
"It's a matter of overcoming the religious arrogance, the religious chauvinism, the narrow-mindedness, the judgmentalism that often comes from insecurity," Schanker said.
Schwartz agreed that a judgmental attitude is a problem, but he said it appears those opposed to the display of the cross are the ones suffering from it.
"To paraphrase the man who died on the cross for our sins and the sins of Mr. Schanker and all those Muslims and Jews," Schwartz said, "they ought to take care of the beam in their own eye before they look at the speck in their brother's eye."
Schanker accused those who disagree with the anti-cross movement of overreacting.
"I'm sure, for some narrow-minded Christians, it seems like we're undermining or denying the very foundations of Christian belief. Not at all; nobody is questioning the salvific role or Jesus' sacrificial position," Schanker said. "But we're recognizing from within New Testament understanding that Jesus transcended the cross. Let's not continue crucifying him. That's not where he is."
Schwartz laughed in response to Schanker's statement.
"Getting these lectures on Christology from somebody who's announced himself as an enemy of the cross is really amusing," Schwartz said, recalling a comment made by a little girl in Alexander Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago in reference to prayer in Stalin's Soviet Union.
"Everyone is allowed to pray, as long as no one hears but God," Schwartz quoted. "This is the degree of religious liberty that Mr. Schanker will allow to the one religion that he apparently thinks ought never to speak its name or show its face."
Schwartz found it telling that a group founded by the leader of the "Moonies" would call together Muslims and Jews to renounce "the universal symbol of Christianity as something hateful.
"In the interest of peace, the three who believe that Jesus Christ was not God want to stifle the one who believes that Jesus Christ was God," Schwartz observed. "Is that peace through conquest, peace through surrender, peace through requiring that Christians cease proclaiming their Christianity? That is not an offer of peace."
2003-08-22 16:34 | User Profile
The Moonies have practiced racemixing as the core function of it's "church", and it is no wonder that the APOSTATE Moonies want to destroy the Cross. It is interesting to note that they align themselves with Jews [The Anti-Christ] and Muslims [Heathen Filth] in an all out effort to destroy the Cross.
Moonies are just another branch of the Judeo-Christian church so it really is no suprise to see efforts like this being applied.
I understand what it means here: 2 Corinthians 6
Christians have the choice to be tolerant and stand before God as a Judeo-Christian, in spiritual fellowship and tolerance for other Judeo-Christians.
Christians have the choice to stand for a Holy, Intolerant God and separate themselves from the Judeo-Christians and their APOSTASY.
2003-08-22 19:01 | User Profile
Yes and I'm sure next they'll say that we shouldn't consider Jesus the son of god, because that's implying an elitist point of view that Jesus was more important than normal people; nor should we say that Jesus was perfect, because perfect is a "subjective" term and we don't know what perfect truely means. Hell Jesus was not really the "messiah" but was "the Buddha of the West". Com'on we all know Mary opened her legs, how else could she have been pregnant? Jesus was not the "holy son" but the "holy child", nevermind the fact that Jesus was male so therefore he was a "son". There's only one way to argue that Jesus wasn't really a "son" but for decency reasons I'm not touching that with a 50ft pole! All proves to show you how stupid these liberals can be!
2003-08-27 03:08 | User Profile
Well I am glad this sick evil pro-miscegenation sect is not going to be using the Cross anymore! :)
2003-08-27 12:12 | User Profile
The Moonies are mixed up in all sorts of "kosher conservative" political and media organs like the Washington Times. The money they pilfer from gullible Americans is funneled to all the leading foundations and people in neocondom. The Moonies are big in those circles. From what I hear, the "Rev." Moon is quite attracted to neocon apocolyptic utopianism for theological reasons. Perhaps this is a case of I'll scratch your (Moonie) back if you scratch my (Jewish) back.
2003-08-27 14:15 | User Profile
Originally posted by Oklahomaman@Aug 27 2003, 07:12 * The Moonies are mixed up in all sorts of "kosher conservative" political and media organs like the Washington Times. The money they pilfer from gullible Americans is funneled to all the leading foundations and people in neocondom. The Moonies are big in those circles. From what I hear, the "Rev." Moon is quite attracted to neocon apocolyptic utopianism for theological reasons. Perhaps this is a case of I'll scratch your (Moonie) back if you scratch my (Jewish) back.*
I remember an article somewhere a few years ago outlining the extensive ties between the good Reverend Moon and Bush the First. I'll have to see if I can dig that up somewhere.
2003-08-27 16:12 | User Profile
.....While I don't abide by the moonies for a second, Christians should take a look at this; Our Christ was hung on a stauros, in the Greek, a "stake"... No "cross" in Christianity, sorry...
[url=http://www.angelfire.com/nv/TheOliveBranch/append162.html]http://www.angelfire.com/nv/TheOliveBranch.../append162.html[/url]
2003-08-27 20:22 | User Profile
This form of intellectual dishonesty relies on saying that stauros translates to "stake" in English therefore the Greek usage must conform to English technical specifications regardless of English word usage and vocabulary not to mention Greek.
The NT was written in a Greek dialect called Kione and not classical Greek of the Homerian period which fell into disuse even before Alexander's time. There is no word in Greek that signifies two pieces of wood fixed at an angle and planted into the ground. There really was no other word for them to use to describe the innovative execution practices of the Romans. It does not at all help your case that the Romans did not execute people with a singular vertical pole (a purely Carthaginian practice). They did with a "t" or "T" shape and later with an "X", "Y" , "H" and finally something that resembled the modern football goal post. Stauros is also linguistically related to "staff", "post" and "stave" which all denote wooden supports at placed at horizontally to the ground. The theory holds water like a sieve. Sorry, stauros means cross.
2003-08-27 20:38 | User Profile
Well...
.....You're certainly free to disagree, however, the text of the Companion Bible was edited by E. W. Bullinger, a fully recognized authority on the Hebrew and Greek languages; what of the solar wheel and the "mark", or six hundred, threescore, and six, (#5516, Strong's), which is, likewise, a "cross"? There was no "cross", imo...
2003-08-28 15:06 | User Profile
Patrick, Are you a Russelite? Jehova's Witnesses reject the Cross.
2003-08-28 15:42 | User Profile
Heavens, no...
.....Rutherford and Russell were two "jews" that built a deceptive religion; nothing more...