Post by Tomas on Oct 17, 2020 17:59:52 GMT
During last weeks I´ve got myself into least three different difficulties in the sphere of Dialogue... In the form (loose as anything) of some personal talks with 1) an adherent to one of the major Eastern religions, 2) a high level Freemason, 3) a Muslim very active in another online forum. What has made me a bit confused in reflecting is: a) is it a good thing to actually confront any issues of difference - ever?, b) how could one avoid treadle in the traps of untruth, either about Christianity itself - easily done, the devils are always in the details - or the other part´s system - least as easily that is, and even more due to lack of knowing the facts?
It should be noted that all three occasions were made on a friendly basis, kind of like curious chats to some acquaintance. Problem tend to begin simply by being too far spontaneous, asking a bit too much if you will, and thus finding only in hindsight that the whole approach might have been rather unwise. I don´t know, if we hadn´t talked, nothing of this sort of doubt would have happened, but nothing else either.
Other recent talks has been "ecumenical" with least in one case a similar result. The first was a rather happy thing, stopping by a young street preacher in the neighbourhood (!) that turned out to be a Pentecostal, inspired to dare it "by the Holy Spirit" and then doing it impeccably well. The second was more like the aforesaid, but in that case it was only an incident online in a dubious fundamentalist Facebook group and also perhaps it was mostly due to not really knowing the person on the other side.
How are your own stances when it comes to such conversations as suggested? (Apart from family or work places, where nothing personal would need to come to the surface in the same way "by choice".)
It should be noted that all three occasions were made on a friendly basis, kind of like curious chats to some acquaintance. Problem tend to begin simply by being too far spontaneous, asking a bit too much if you will, and thus finding only in hindsight that the whole approach might have been rather unwise. I don´t know, if we hadn´t talked, nothing of this sort of doubt would have happened, but nothing else either.
Other recent talks has been "ecumenical" with least in one case a similar result. The first was a rather happy thing, stopping by a young street preacher in the neighbourhood (!) that turned out to be a Pentecostal, inspired to dare it "by the Holy Spirit" and then doing it impeccably well. The second was more like the aforesaid, but in that case it was only an incident online in a dubious fundamentalist Facebook group and also perhaps it was mostly due to not really knowing the person on the other side.
How are your own stances when it comes to such conversations as suggested? (Apart from family or work places, where nothing personal would need to come to the surface in the same way "by choice".)