With CMI on Open Mindedness - on Different Levels

Comments to article

I

Name: Ioannes Georgius Lundahl
Country: France
Permission to publish name? yes

In response to article: Should we be open-minded?
http://creation.com/open-minded

Message:
To Danyl:

"I was only a pious christian when 7 years old during my 1st communion classes, half my lifetime ago."

If it was half your lifetime ago, the other half would be from birth to age 7, i e you are 14.

"But that was based on blind faith and the fact I was mostly unaware of anything else."

Being faithful to whatever religion is true is incumbent on even a seven year old (insofar as he has access to it). Those most likely to have access to it are those raised in Catholic families. And one raised in a Catholic family is at age 7 not always likely to be well aware of anything else. So, not being aware of anything else half a lifetime ago is not an argument for calling it blind faith.

"All I wish is to come to an understanding with the world and how it works and Islam is what I’ve choosen. It has motivated me to become a better person: more friendly, pious, wise, motivated, and open."

It has motivated others in other ways.

It is however better than some things, for instance atheism or satanism.

Get hold of Pope St Pius X' Catechism of Christian Doctrine, and return to Catholic Christianity.

To Lita:

"simply adhering to sacraments or attending church services won’t save you, if you don’t believe Jesus."

If at an age capable of reflexion one is consciously not believing Jesus, one is not simply adhering to sacraments but committing sacrilege. [If receiving them]

That does not mean that one would be lacking faith and salvation if adhering to baptism (and in some cases communion) before the age of reason. Faith is a gift and not a "good work", and hence does not initially depend on our efforts.

"One can only be open-minded about things that don’t really matter. I am very closed-minded when it comes to allowing drunk pilots to fly, for instance, because that’s a very real safety i [Limit of comment length]

II

Name: Ioannes Georgius Lundahl
Country: France
Permission to publish name? yes

In response to article: Should we be open-minded?

Message:
Continued:

"One can only be open-minded about things that don’t really matter. I am very closed-minded when it comes to allowing drunk pilots to fly, for instance, because that’s a very real safety issue."

I sense a double sense of the word open-minded.

One sense is considering everything. Another sense is not definitely condemning anything. The first sense is enjoined, the second forbidden by St Paul.

There are cases when drunk pilots should fly.

Scenario: one air plane. One place which will be flooded in less than half an hour. Three persons. One child, one person with a fever and one who is drunk (got drunk before he saw the emergency). He is also the only one who has learned to fly. SO, he should get the other two into the plane, take off (which is not the most dangerous part) and hope he gets sufficiently sober for when it is time to land.

"Your open-mindedness, far from being a virtue, removes the possibility of honest debate."

I would have thought this answer more appropriate to a diplomat age 40 than to a boy age 14.

Back to Danyl:

You mentioned Palestine Israel conflict.

My knowledge of history - via the book The Desert a City by one Derwas Chitty - of Egypt and Palestine tells me that much like Egyptians descend from Copts rather than from Ishmaelites but were conquered by Omar and some of his Ishmaelite soldiers settled there and became heads of Muslim community of Egypt, so also Palestinians and Jordanians mainly but not exclusively descend from the people who lived there 2000 years ago (Jews, Samarians, Galileans West of Jordan River, Edomites, Moabites, Ammonites East of Jordan River), and they were Christians (except a Jewish confessional minority) up to when Omar came and forced many tribes to become Muslims. So Israelite = Palestinian origins.

III

Name: Ioannes Georgius Lundahl
Country: France
Permission to publish name? yes

In response to article: Should we be open-minded?

Message:
Editorial edition to the title of essay:

"Should Christians embrace teachings from other religions?"

I would answer depends in which teachings.

Pythagorean Theorem was to the most commonly accessible sources of history discovered by a man who thanked false gods by sacrificing 100 oxen to them.

King Solomon may or may not have formulated it before him, but the Bible does not say he did.

Or Sumerian Annunaki worshippers and Grecian worshippers of Olympians say there was a flood and one man was saved because of a divine warning. I do not think CMI is rejecting that teaching "from other religions". There are however Liberal and Modernist Theologians who do, precisely because "flood story as such is a teaching of paganism, the only thing the Bible adds is that God had the whole thing in his hand and promised not to do it agains and ... so these are what we need to believe, but believing Flood story as such is a Paganism".

Annunaki are certainly false gods and so are Olympians, insofar as they were worshipped. Some of them were true men, some of them true phenomena of nature.

None of the men, none of the phenomena of nature accepted any benefit from sacrifice given to their honour over centuries. Of course a wicked man wanting to be worshipped or a careless man who does not want to know if gifts are signs of worship might get, for a while, material benefits.

This brings us to a few other points:

• if almost all Pagan religions and Platonic philosophy as well accepts that almost everything is moved by spirits - can a Christian accept it?
• if Plato and Aristotle were Pagans, can one accept their philosophy, notably Aristotelian proofs for God's existence based on Geocentrism?

[Limit of comment length]

IV

Name: Ioannes Georgius Lundahl
Country: France
Permission to publish name? yes

In response to article: Should we be open-minded?

Message:
Continued:

To me the answer is very clear. YES, because neither of these contradict and both are somewhat confirmed by the Bible.

• The Song of the Three Young Men in the Furnace in Daniel 3, Baruch chapter 3 AND Job 38 (which even Protestants accept) affirm that stars are either themselves spirits or at least moved by such.
  
  Christ's words on lake Genesareth to the waves and Joshua's words to Sun and Moon imply the visible phenomena are moved by spirits.
  
  
• Geocentrism is confirmed by Joshua chapter X. Direct and Patristic reading. God's existence being provable is confirmed by Romans 1:[18 - ] 20.
  
  
• And the word about philosophy that is after human traditions and not after Christ refers either to Epicurean and possibly also Stoic philosophy. Plato and Aristotle had ceased to be that popular.

Answer about comments

Dear Ioannes Georgius Lundahl,
Thank you for your comment (see below) about the article on creation.com titled Should we be open-minded?.

Dear Mr Lundahl,
you have submitted several comments once again to promote Catholic doctrine. As I have mentioned before when you were contacting me, we are an unapologetically evangelical organization so we will not be posting your comments. We mean no ill will but I/we will not be responding further. As a faith funded ministry we need to focus our energies on our mandate which is dealing with primarily with the origins issue.
Kind regards.

My answer thereto

Speaking of faith, this time you are promoting continued Apostasy from the Catholic faith to Danyl.

You are "faith funded". In other words, you take money to promote what your funders consider the faith.

You are also writers, usually pretty good ones. I am a writer too. But I feel sorely ill-treated by colleagues like you.

Ioannes Georgius or in Swedish Hans Georg Lundahl