The name Mohammad is given to sons to show respect. Why is the name Jesus not given the same respect?

The name Mohammad is given to sons to show respect. Why is the name Jesus not given the same respect?

Many cultures pass on names of those they wish to show respect to. The Muslim community pass on the name Mohamad more than Christians do with the name of Jesus. This name respect is lacking in the Christian cultures.

I think it is due to the fact that none in the Abrahamic cults can justify Yahweh/Jesus’ genocide of mankind.

Yahweh’s son Jesus has not been deemed worthy of respect for moral reasons. Christians recognize the imperfections and agree with the ostracising of the name Jesus. Hence their not passing on the name and showing disrespect. Jesus is as unworthy to literal reading people in the myriad of Christian cults, as is Yahweh.

Are the myriad of Christian and Catholic cults showing a lack of respect for the name of Jesus as compared to the respect Muslims show the name Mohammad?

Regards
DL

The question has no relevance in many Catholic nations, where male children are often given the name Jesus, and females are sometimes christened Mary-Jesus.  That's probably why it's called the Christian name.

oftenwrong wrote:The question has no relevance in many Catholic nations, where male children are often given the name Jesus, and females are sometimes christened Mary-Jesus.  That's probably why it's called the Christian name.

Mexico is the only place I know of where Jesus is commonly used.

As to relevance to Catholic/Christian nations, you might be right, as they do not really seem to follow Christian doctrine or care to use Jesus for anything other than a scapegoat.

The Netherlands for instance shows 95% of the population claiming to be Christian, yet only about 4% ever go into a church even once a year.

Regards
DL

Ah.  Just as "Some animals are more equal than others" (Orwell) - some religions are more Christian than others.  I knew there must be an explanation.  It's like Sunni Moslems and the other varieties always at war with each other.

Probably a lot more to do with humankind than anything spiritual.

oftenwrong wrote:Ah.  Just as "Some animals are more equal than others" (Orwell) - some religions are more Christian than others.  I knew there must be an explanation.  It's like Sunni Moslems and the other varieties always at war with each other.

Probably a lot more to do with humankind than anything spiritual.

I would say more religion driven. That would include humans of course but conditioned humans and not the free thinkers.

You might listen to what this guru has to say. He shows, basically, why God is synonymous with war.



Regards
DL

Why believe this nonsense? Even your gnostic christianity immediately creates conflict because as soon as you say you 'believe' it, you are telling someone else they are wrong for not believing it. Religious belief is designed to create conflict. It means believing in gods that give you the justification to be a gigantic jerk to someone else's belief.

Exactly, that is why I speak little of my beliefs in what cannot be proven and try to argue morals which can have an end point based on logic and reason and not belief.

Jesus was quite correct in saying that when we pray, we should do so in private. You will note that that is the last thing most theists do.

Some religions deserve the disrespect of the masses.

Both Christianity and Islam have basically developed into intolerant, homophobic and misogynous religions. Both religions have grown themselves by the sword instead of good deeds and continue with their immoral ways in spite of secular law showing them the moral ways.

Jesus said we would know his people by their works and deeds. That means Jesus would not recognize Christians and Muslims as his people, and neither do I. Jesus would call Christianity and Islam abominations.

Gnostic Christians did in the past, and I am proudly continuing that tradition and honest irrefutable evaluation based on morality.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am wrote:Some religions deserve the disrespect of the masses.

There are plenty of Catholic ladies who have been christened Mary but probably get called by their middle names. The same is probably true of the males on Corfu who have been named ‘Spyro’ after a gentleman called Spyridon. He was a Cypriot who was made the patron saint of Corfu after being credited with ridding that island of the plague!

So does it matter what names people give to their children? There’s nothing to stop Christians calling their sons Jesus if they wish. Alarm bells start ringing when I see threads like this and wonder if we’re to be treated to a round of Muslim-bashing.

As for respect for religions, Richard Dawkins, writing in 2006 (‘The God Delusion’ p.306), put it better than I can: “As long as we accept the principle that religious faith must be respected simply because it is religious faith, it is hard to withhold respect from the faith of Osama bin Laden and the suicide bombers. The alternative, one so transparent that it should need no urging, is to abandon the principle of automatic respect for religious faith. This is one reason why I do everything in my power to warn people against faith itself, not just against so-called ‘extremist’ faith. The teachings of ‘moderate’ religion, though not extremist in themselves, are an open invitation to extremism.”

Then of course there was Voltaire’s warning that “those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities”. I do, however, have respect for some individuals who happen to have a religion. For example, we are privileged to have Jill Segger, a blogger who happens to be a Quaker, on this forum. She certainly doesn’t fit your description of “intolerant, homophobic and misogynous”. I recommend that you read some of her fine posts:-
https://cuttingedge2.forumotion.co.uk/f30-a-place-to-stand-in

Members can’t reply on a blog, but you are welcome to comment on the feedback thread which is provided. I hope you will. You may also be inclined to reply to this message, but if you do, please don’t re-post the whole of it. It isn’t necessary, and I’m sure other members and guests wouldn’t want to be presented with my limited knowledge of religious issues more than once. Thanks.

Dawkins has a decent mind and I agree with most of what he does and says.

Muslim bashing is rather wasted here as there does not seem to be any Muslims here.

There are a few Christians though but they have been brought to heel by the better minds here to the point that they hardly post.

Perhaps they know enough to stay away from those who would make them look less intelligent than they likely are.

That is what debates with theists do.

I will check your link. Thanks.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am wrote:..... Muslim bashing is rather wasted here as there does not seem to be any Muslims here.
There are a few Christians though but they have been brought to heel by the better minds here to the point that they hardly post.
Perhaps they know enough to stay away from those who would make them look less intelligent than they likely are.
That is what debates with theists do...
Regards
DL

Debate is either open to anyone or it is just preaching to the Choir.

I agree but do not have control of the Christians who back out due to not looking too bright or moral or Muslims who seem to stay out of most Christian debate sites for the same reasons.

Regards
DL

In regards to the OP. Could it be that there is more respect by not naming ones own son(s) Jesus (aside those catholics mentioned in OW's post) simply because of the very high status that is understood biblically that Jesus holds?

For example : Who names their son God?

Jsmythe wrote:

In regards to the OP. Could it be that there is more respect by not naming ones own son(s) Jesus (aside those catholics mentioned in OW's post)

Look at your own family tree. Are your ancestors names reused out of respect or disrespect?

simply because of the very high status that is understood biblically that Jesus holds?

For example : Who names their son God?

God is a title, not a name, to most. Jesus is a name.

We do not call our children President or Priminister either.

Further.

Jesus is only seen as God by Christians, but they have to ignore that God cannot die to say that Jesus is God.

Regards
DL

I've never encountered anyone before who equates Jesus with God. Perhaps it's the perceived family resemblance.

I've never encountered anyone before who equates Jesus with God.

Really? Isn't this the basis of the trinity, that he is supposed to be both son of God and God? Just how anyone rationalises a trinity is a monotheism escapes me though, but then so does a perfectly merciful deity that commits genocide, endorses slavery, and encourages rapine, murder and sex trafficking by it's 'chosen' people.

oftenwrong wrote:I've never encountered anyone before who equates Jesus with God.  Perhaps it's the perceived family resemblance.

The Trinity concept is followed by most Christians. What else can I say.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am wrote:

God is a title, not a name, to most. Jesus is a name.

We do not call our children President or Priminister either.


DL

True ...I was using an analogy highlighting the "importance" on how it would be percieved in regards to Jesus. By this I would say Jesus has more respect.

We can debate more about names and meaning but this would change the discussion.

Indeed.

Thanks for not doing so.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am wrote:There are a few Christians though but they have been brought to heel by the better minds here to the point that they hardly post. Perhaps they know enough to stay away from those who would make them look less intelligent than they likely are......Christians who back out due to not looking too bright or moral or Muslims who seem to stay out of most Christian debate sites for the same reasons.

We rarely know why members stop posting. Some have died during the six-year life of this forum, but we only know that if their relatives or friends tell us (and in one case it was revealed on another site). Some may find the discussions elsewhere more stimulating, some may just get bored with posting anywhere, some may prefer the faster responses of Twitter and Facebook, some may no longer be able to spare the time. Some may well leave when they are constantly losing an argument, as one lady did over Brexit nearly eighteen months ago.

Just a thought.....isn’t reaching conclusions on an issue without any solid evidence the very reason you castigate religious believers?

True.

Without the continuing plethora of evidence, I would relent.

Regards
DL