The papers are reporting the "christening" of a warship - the U.S.S. George H.W. Bush. Do any Christians take offense to the idea of "christening" an inanimate object whose sole purpose is to take party in violent, military action? I'm not a Christian, but I believe that Jesus was a pacifist and always preached about turning the other cheek and loving your enemy - not blowing them into oblivion. I am not a pacifist - and I have no problem with a new warship having some sort of official naming ceremony - but to call that naming ceremony a "christening" just appears strange & slightly offensive to me. I mean, a warship doesn't have a soul, it doesn't have faith, and it won't be resurrected at the end of time. Additionally, the name of the ship being "Christened" isn't a saint or a man of a noble life - but of an ex-president. Do you have a problem with the term "Christening" being, in a sense, politicized. Your thoughts are appreciated.
2006-10-08 04:57:36 · 8 answers · asked by captain2man 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The word 'christening' comes from the middle ages or dark ages when the Catholic church held absolute rule over the old western Roman empire. When a 'gentile' was baptized by the catholics, they were given a 'christen' name, and there old name was not used any official way. So giving a warship a 'christian' name has the same meaning for me, none at all. It means nothing. It is just the following of human tradition and has as much meaning to me, none at all.
2006-10-08 05:05:06 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Generalizations are not often a well notion. But, then again, they are most likely situated on a few center of reality. For instance, within the United States, there are lots of Christian companies which might be very competitive in seeking to put in force their variation of morality, that's specially restrictive and illiberal. Even oppressive. I do not believe that may be referred to as "liberal" via any definition of the time period. Considering that truth, it is comprehensible why one could gererally take into account non-Christians extra liberal than Christians.
2016-08-29 06:05:52 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Jesus wasn't a pacifist, and he wasn't a democrat or a republican either. To try to attach such a lable to Him is to isolate a verse and take it out of the context of the rest of the bible. Remember that Jesus is the same God as the God of the Old Testament. No lable can be attached to Him other than the fact that He is God and son to the Father. He is the way the Truth and the light, and no one gets to the Father except through the Son.
2006-10-08 05:35:33 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Jesus was not a pacifist, he was a militant suicidist.
And "to christen" can be used as a synonym for "to name".
It's not the same as baptise. Even the Americans wouldnt be so stupid as to baptise a warship!
(I don't know though)
2006-10-08 05:01:45 · answer #4 · answered by Mrs Mole 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
While the words appear similar, they are actually two entirely different derivatives...."Christian" literally means to be like or of or belonging to Christ. To christen something is an entirely different word structure.
2006-10-08 05:00:00 · answer #5 · answered by You'll Never Outfox the Fox 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Probably concerned about the bottle being broken, all the glass on the ground. Someone better clean it up.
2006-10-08 05:00:02 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
whats the problem its gone on for years we are Christians not Muslims we are bigger than that,
2006-10-08 05:01:06 · answer #7 · answered by quasar 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It doesn't have the same meaning at all. Good Luck! :)
2006-10-08 04:58:55 · answer #8 · answered by tysavage2001 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋