Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Orlanth wrote:I am a theologian by the way, amongst other things.

I'm fresh out of ribbons so I'm afraid you'll just have to wait. Being a theologian means you can speak to your specific sides veiw, but if you think you can speak for all Jewish Zombie lovers then it shows the poverty of your religious education. I guess you just get a silver ribbon instead of a gold.

Ok. I will bite. Any half good theologian should be able to understand the viewpoints of several denominations of their own faith and have a good understanding of several more faiths as appropriate. This is different than forming agreement with any.

Someone could for example give a reasonable synopsis of Islam without being Moslem, but unless they have some form of theological training, and understand 'religion' per se they are likely to miss much.

I claim no exclusivity in this, there is no reason why an honest and equally informed Moslem theologian could not be equally open minded.

I dont know any Jewish Zombie worshippers, but my grasp of religion is not so poor as to misunderstand what you are implying. Sorry, the ones who are least able to have discourse on religion are those unable to do so except in derogatory terms.

Jewish zombie isn't a derogatory term, it is an apt description. One you may not like but that doesn't make it not so. Now if I called Jesus an donkey-cave that would be, but he wasn't, just many of the followers are, but that is true of many religions.

Also, saying you are theologian doesn't mean much because you have given nothing to back it up which leads me to wonder just what real training you have. Perhaps you spent a weekend at a seminary retreat or maybe you went there full blown. Even then it focuses the knowledge on the tenets of your specific brand of faith, not broadening it to all understanding. There is a difference between Religions Studies and Theology after all. if I want to understand Catholocism I can talk to a bishop, but if I want to understand the variations of expressions of Christianity is say, the United States I would have to go elsewhere. Theology lets a Bishop understand the catechism, Religious Studies understands why protestants and catholics kill each other while claiming authority over the subject. Now it is possible to be both, but that isn't what you brought up or the terminology you use which leads me to think you have a layman's training in your field.

Obliviously you don't need to be a member of a heretical unorthodox offshoot of Judaism to understand Islam or Christianity. Many people study many things they are not a part of. It's not a question of open minded, it's a question of seeing what is in front of you.

You are the one claiming a homogeneous element to Christianity that doesn't exist. There are Christians, and large numbers of them, that would say that you are just wrong. Your response has been that they aren't true Christians. The point being, no amount of Theological training actually would give you that authority. You are stating an opinion as fact, which of course is theologians way I suppose.

Lets take this elsewhere, I am happy to reply to your comments, but no longer on this thread.