Community archive

Ask something
Discussion Locked

A religious discussion

0 helpful
213 replies

by jardinier

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

As I browse through other discussions, I note that there is a strong tendency to branch off into some religious side thread.

This would suggest to me that some people are hanging out for a really hot religious debate and I believe I have the topic to suit.

[b]?Either Christianity is true, or it is the greatest fraud ever perpetrated upon human kind.?[/b]

I don?t think I have ever thought of myself as a Christian, but mainly for social reasons I have attended a variety of churches on and off throughout my life. Thus I am moderately familiar with Scripture, very familiar with essential doctrines, and very, very familiar with which aspects of this religion are accentuated by different groups or denominations.

So for most of my life I just thought of Christianity as one of the several major religions in the world ? just one of several ways to reach God, The Truth, Enlightenment, Heaven, Nirvana or whatever.

HOWEVER on my recent foray into discussions at two American Christian websites ? which like TR have members from other countries besides the USA ? I encountered an overwhelming emphasis on certain aspects of this religion which had not been stressed ? nay even had been bypassed ? in mainstream churches.

Well here it is in a nutshell. According to the predominant views expressed at these websites, the quintessential doctrine of Christianity is all about who will be saved and spend eternity with God (in all three persons ? Father, Son and Holy Spirit) and who will spend eternity in hellfire. The requirements for salvation are (1) by the grace of God (quite arbitrary according to which school you follow) and (2) accepting that Jesus died on the cross to pay for your sins.

Leading an ethical life is fine too, but it is the BIG either/or that overrides all other considerations.

These hard-core ?Bible Based? Christians for the most part believe that people belonging to established Christian denominations are as surely hell bound as Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, atheists, agnostics and so forth.

Personally I think this is garbage, but it does highlight the way in which Christianity is unique among religions. It is the ONLY major religion which offers this black-and-white ultimatum ? eternal heaven or eternal hell.

Of course all religions conveniently teach that reward or punishment will be dealt out AFTER death ?- whether it be heaven and hell or reincarnation -- so that you have to take it on faith anyhow.

Because of its evangelical nature, coupled with colonisation of large parts of the world by Europeans, Christianity is the most widely practised religion in the world with 33 per cent of the world?s population as nominal followers.

In an event known as the ?Rapture? ? in the end times, when Jesus returns, all the ?good? Christians (those who follow the correct doctrine) will be lifted up to heaven, and the rest of the unfortunate human race will be dispelled to hell to suffer very hot conditions for all eternity.

Now if Christ DOESN?T return, then all the bloodshed, guilt and other negative by products of this religion will have been in vain.

As you all know, I have my own interpretation of Christianity which includes some mystical aspects, but I DO NOT, never have and hopefully never will believe in an ETERNAL state of anything.

Eastern religions ? especially Hinduism and its offspring Buddhism -- teach that enlightenment or whatever can be achieved by various clearly set out paths. It is only Christianity ? and perhaps Islam (of which I know very little) ? which place salvation in the hands of a God who chooses by a whim who will be saved.

I have not set out this preamble as well as I would have liked, but no doubt other thoughts will occur to me if people respond to this discussion.

213 replies

by dr dij

Religion at its worst is a bunch of cr*p, inciting its followers to hate crimes. Christianity in the past especially, and Islam currently (for the poorer, less educated followers in particular).

At its best, it keeps people from doing a bunch of things they shouldn't and at times help people with charity and self help. Why should everyone have to re-think up A) daily code of life, B) reasons to wonder at the marvels of life on earth.

Problem is, much is petrified thought, as people take it too literally. Christians in taking the bible word for word, and Muslims for taking paragraphs from the Koran out of context, telling them to kill all non-believers.

by unclerob

you should blame human nature,
it's in our nature to take advantage of others, to harm others, to kill others, just for personal gain. This isn't something that religion (I would hope in any form) doesn't dictate to anyone to do, pretty much the opposite.

Human civilization as we know it for the most part (yes there are lots of good people out there, unfortunately though I would have to concede that there is much more bad out there than good) is made up of the most uncivilized creatures on the planet.

You can't blame religion for that or God.

by Member 25348569

...the Spanish Inquisition have happened without the Catholic Church?

...anti-Semitism have been quite so ingrained in Western society were it not for the Christian Church?

...the Holcaust have happened without the Christian Church?

It is a fact that the Jews do not accept Jesus and this can be seen in the absolute silence on the part of Israel concerning her most influential son. The Jews at the time of Jesus saw that the impossible claims made for Jesus as the new God of the Gentile Christians simply spurned the universal God of Judaism. The raising of Jesus to a deity destroyed whatever interest there may have been on the part of Jews in his teachings.

This antipathy of the Jews towards the teachings of Christ was duly noted and, once in power, instead of putting the teachings of Jesus into practice, Christians began a reign of anti-semitic terror throughout the Roman world. This has continued down through the centuries. In the name of Christ, Jews were treated with contempt, hunted down, tortured cruelly, and killed.

This culminated in the Holocaust.

Although Christian apologists vehemently argue that the Catholic Hitler was "no Christian", the Christian Chruch's attitude towards the Jews is directly responsible for the widespread European anti-semitic attitude that made the Holocaust possible.

I'm afraid, Uncle Rob, that I can blame religion. And if God exists, I blame Him above all.

Neil

by dmambo

You state:
"...Christianity is unique among religions. It is the ONLY major religion which offers this black-and-white ultimatum ? eternal heaven or eternal hell."

I'm way below the median when it comes to knowledge of world religions (even my own religion!), but I believe that Islam presents this same ultimatum to it's adherents. In fact, some branches of Islam seem to have twisted it into a mandate to punish the Infidel.

BTW - I consider myself a Christian, although most other Christians would probably consider me to be a pretty crappy one, but I draw a distinction between the religious, dogmatic practice and the practice of trying to emulate Christ. Not that we mere mortals could ever reach that goal. I think it's unfortunate that most Christian denominations emphasize the dogma rather than the behavior.

by jardinier

I did say that I don't know much about Islam.

HOWEVER there is one HUGE difference between Christianity and Islam in that salvation is not dependent on Jesus dying on the cross.

In fact the Koran asserts that Jesus, as the incarnation of God, would not have submitted himself to crucifixion.

[4.157] And their saying: Surely we have killed the Messiah, Isa son of Marium, the apostle of Allah; and they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to them so (like Isa) and most surely those who differ therein are only in a doubt about it; they have no knowledge respecting it, but only follow a conjecture, and they killed him not for sure.

Easy search online Koran:

http://www.hti.umich.edu/k/koran

by jardinier

I, too, am 100 per cent Christian in that sense and have been for 40 years.

[Emphasis on [b]"trying"[/b]]

by jardinier

I believe there are four references by Jesus to eternal damnation:

Matthew 23:33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

Matthew 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Mark 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:

John 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

by tony hopkinson

LOL

Come on Julian a lot of the branches into religious discussions are down to you.

Don't think I'll have much to contribute to this one though, makes as much sense are arguing whether it's more likely that there is life on venus or jupiter to me.

If you really want to know, go find out. Now I'd be happy to go visit either of those two planets, heaven, hell, Allah's Garden etc, well I can hold my curiosity in check on that front.

Talked to one religious person, who told me you went to heaven if your name was in the book (lamb, fate ?) and that it had nothing to do with your actions on earth as long as you repented them.
I must confess to a hearty distrust of anyone subscribing to such a belief.

by swk14

to me, is the fact that still today a majority of the population still has faith in myths. I suppose it's because of the fear of oblivion. If you could travel back in time 2000 years, I doubt you would go for medical attention. You would think those that lived that long ago to be primitive. You would probably be horrified at how they treated most medical conditions. Yet when it comes to the writings from an ancient book 2000 years ago, people believe it without hesitation.

by dr dij

In a Simpsons episode, homer dies and goes to heaven. Where he manages to tick off..

Anyway, I won't spoil it for you if you haven't seen it.

by swk14

It was on a business trip in Tampa Bay...Mons Venus. If that's not heaven, then I don't know what is.

by jardinier

i.e. predestination, which is a fundamental doctrine of Calvinism, and that is why I said salvation by a "whim" of God according to which school of thought you follow.

Put simply -- and it is a very simple doctrine -- that God had already decided from the beginning of time, who would be saved.

by jardinier

Actually it was a heated exchange between "adunlap@" and "Absolutely" towards the end of the "Ostrich" discussion which led me to believe that the atheists needed to be fed. :)

by tonythetiger

?Either Christianity is true, or it is the greatest fraud ever perpetrated upon human kind.?

It could be only the second or third greatest fraud....

:)

by deadly ernest

the number of cats you thrown amongst them, and such big ones at that.

1. Never confuse religion, its teachings and what the church hierachy does - they are three separate things that have very little in common. Especially, do not blame any religion for the actions of power hungry scum who use the religion button to convince gullible people to do things for them - nearly all of the killing in the name of God was done at the behest of people in power seeking more power or wealth. Yes, even the crusades - study the trade routes and it is clear.

2. There are many common aspects of all the major religions - wont detail all here as it don't have the space for a 20,000 word essay. BTW The Qu'ran has large sections of the Tora and the New Testament as Mohammed borrowed heavily from both the Jews and Christians of his era.

3. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) teach that you do get some heavenly rewards in this world as the Heavenly Father pours forth blessing upon your head for doing good.

4. Jesus of Nazareth stated 'In my Father's house are many mansions, this is so, or I would not have told you this." This clearly indicates that there is more than one religious path to heaven that was established by God.

5. The concept of a predetermined elect group is an old Hewbraic one and not part of the teachings of Jesus.

6. Christians should follow the teachings of Jesus Christ and try to emulate his teachings and life. Since he taught tollerance, forgiving, mercy and acceptance of people for what they are - then all true Christians should live their life accordingly.

I think that is enough for you to think on and dispute for now.

by jellimonsta

Could you please elaborate on #4?

[q]4. Jesus of Nazareth stated 'In my Father's house are many mansions, this is so, or I would not have told you this." This clearly indicates that there is more than one religious path to heaven that was established by God. [/q]

From KJV, John 14:6 "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

by jardinier

John 14:6 is the verse invariably quoted by Christians to eliminate the possibility of authenticity in any other religion.

However I have always interpreted the "many mansions" in the same way as Deadly Ernest.

by deadly ernest

and God has a way for those people to reach heaven, thus the passage re many mansions.

In John 14 we are told about the many mansions, then about Jesus prepare a place, and then about that place being available oly through him. Thus those who have the opportunity to know Jesus and he prepares a place for them can only get there through him - kind of like a special deal holiday travel agency that can only be booked through the set network. Having had the opportunity to know Jesus we do not have access to the other mansions any more, but those who have not this opportunity do.

Anyway, God gave us freewill so feel free to exercise yours and disagree. Better yet ask God in prayer for the truth and He may open up this knowledge to you, or he may not if you are not ready yet. We each follow our own path at our own speed.

One mistake that many people make is that they try to interpret the full meaning of a verse in the middle of a chapter without taking into account what was said before it. John 14:2 is at the start of the statement and thus it and the rest upto 14:5 has to be included when interpreting 14:6.

One of my favorite cases of this is from the Old Testament, forget which book, where denigrating statements are made about the 'great whore' and predicts the death of the 'great whore'. What many forget when discussing this is that the 'great whore' being referred to is the city of Jerusalem as the whole chapter is about the city.

by faradhi

I have always interpreted John 14:6 to mean that by Jesus' death and resurrection, the Kingdom of Heaven will be open to all. Including non Christians.

He goes on to prepare them for his death and resurrection.

by jardinier

Not taught by Jesus, for sure, but still a belief that clings in some traditions.

Here is an outline from the Grolier Encyclopedia:

Predestination is a Christian doctrine according to which a person's ultimate destiny, whether it be salvation or damnation, is determined by God alone prior to, and apart from, any worth or merit on the person's part. In some cases, it is claimed that God only determines those to be saved; in others, that he determines those to be saved and those to be condemned. The latter teaching is called double predestination.

Predestination has roots in the Old Testament concept of an elect people. Hints of the doctrine appear in the New Testament, especially in Rom. 8:28-30, 9:6-24. It does not appear in full form, however, until the 5th century in the writings of Saint AUGUSTINE. Opposing PELAGIANISM, which held that humans can merit salvation by good works performed by application of their own will, Augustine insisted that humans require the help of God's GRACE to do good and that this grace is a free gift, given by God without regard to human merit. Thus God alone determines who will receive the grace that alone assures salvation. In this sense God predestines some to salvation.

Augustine's teaching was generally upheld by the church, but the further idea that some are predestined to condemnation was explicitly rejected at the Council of Orange (529). The classical medieval formulation, based on Augustine, was given by Thomas AQUINAS in Summa Theologica.

The doctrine of predestination again became important in the late medieval period and passed into the theology of the Protestant reformers, especially John CALVIN. Calvin also insisted, against other forms of Christian theology, that grace is a gift and that a person cannot earn salvation. In the course of subsequent controversies, Calvin's doctrine of double predestination was strongly affirmed by the Synod of Dort (1619) in Holland and in the Westminster Confession (1647) in England. Until recently, it has remained a characteristic teaching of churches in the Calvinist tradition (see CALVINISM; PRESBYTERIANISM). In other branches of Christianity, however, it has received only limited support.

The 20th-century theologian Karl BARTH radically restated the doctrine of predestination. He argued that God's election and condemnation of humankind converge in the divine election and rejection of Jesus Christ. In Jesus' resurrection lies all humankind's salvation.

by jkaras

Ah Venus, what a great time I had there. Too bad they didnt serve drinks. :(
A few bucks lighter, smelling of purfume, and a grin across my face I was quite.....anxious. It had some of the best talent Florida has to offer, after all the clubs were basically shut down here in Orlando. A girl called McKensie was my favorite.

by swk14

However, the place across the stret with the space ship on the roof is good too. The girls arent quite as cute, but they work a little harder for the dollar. I love capitalism!

by jkaras

was created by man, not God to establish rules to govern mankind in a time of lawlessness. You, me, or anyone else didnt choose their religion. It was forced upon you by your family and tradition. No parent sits their child down and introduces them to each religion and their beliefs. This devotion results in irrational debate upon the validity of said religion. The person feels that everything that they have know to believe in is false and their life doesnt have meaning.

Religions have come and gone throughout history due to wars and assimilation. That is why all the current religions have survived. They indoctrinate a policy to repopulate their numbers to guarantee survival. This is why religion is against homosexuality and masterbation. Both are counter roductive to their main goal of numbers dominance.

I dont believe in religion, I believe in God. Religion is ok with me if it helps people be better or find that inner confidence. I have a problem with religion when it attempts to control others for gain, vanity, greed, or political agenda. They always fall back on justification on the higher power card. They never hold religious leaders accountable for crimes and bilking of gullible people that are afraid of the unknown or of their own desires. Tv evangelists, molesting priests, emons that scream ghiad, and other religion intolerance to advocate genocide. The only people I hate worse are the religious zealots that curse your existence or harrass if you dont subscribe to their attempted bring to the fold calling you a sinner or what have you.

I have many more issues with this, but it's almost quitting time and a thesis is begining to be formed, so I'll call it quits.

by dobbinsm

I appreciate your views on this subject,jardinier. I, however, believe that God is no respector of persons and doesn't "choose by a whim who will be saved. The Bible, I also believe to be the absolute word of God. It is a guide line for how we should live our lives. (Although, it seems easier to do what is wrong instead of what is right!) 'Religion' is simply man's interpretation of that Word ( or the Bible). I do choose to beleive that God sent His only Son to die for my sin (as all are born into sin since the time of Adam and his fall in the Garden of Eden) A propitiation or go between (if you will) for man and God. I do beleive in His resurection on the third day and I also beleive that He is sitting at the right hand of God this instance making intercession for us to God because we can not in anyway come before God as we are in our 'sin nature' and survive. I also believe that if we are truly believers and followers of Jesus Christ and strive to do what is right according to what is set down in His Word, then we will, one day, join Him in Heaven.

In the Bible there are ten commandments given to Moses by God. If you read and study these commandments, you will see that if we follow them to the best of our ability, then we will do no harm to our fellow men and women, nor to God.

In Phillipians, the Apostle Paul stated, that he (we if you will) don't always do what is right but that the flesh and spirit are a war with each other. So we have to strive to do what is right and push toward the goal of being Christ like. We will by no means reach perfection in the flesh. Only one could and that was Jesus, the Son of God. Who then, you say, can be saved? With man, it is impossible. With God all things are possible. All who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, that He came to die for us because we are sinners will be saved. That is you , me ,our neighbor, or even people across the seas. Every one has the same opportunity and they are not choosen by whim.

I don't think of myself as Baptist, Pentecostal. Catholic, Methodist or Buddist or anything else. I am not a Religion. I am a Christ--ian.

by swk14

with virtually everything you said Jkaras. Up until the point of saying you believe in a God. I don't. Religion in general is so OBVIOUSLY man made for controlling the masses. When a religious person can explain how omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence, (all traits of the mythical X-tian god) can go hand in hand, then we can talk. However, it is impossible. The debate always ends up with the religious person using the "beyond our understanding" line. Bollocks!

by tony hopkinson

Believe or burn in hell for eternity. Well you'd be mad not to, faced with those alternatives.

If christians followed the ten commandments religiously, I'd have more time for them. But the vast majority do not practice what they preach, they are all usually very contrite when they get caught though, I'll give them that.

I am not a sinner, to sin is to offend against god, is it not.
So your Jesus can rest easy on my part, one less burden to carry, I do not believe, so therefore I cannot sin.

Of course YOU can judge me a sinner, this is what usually happens.

by swk14

good ole Pascal's Wager. It is better to believe and be right, then to NOT believe and be wrong. However, since their god is all knowing, then he would probably be able to figure out that I truly don't believe, I'm just faking it. Which since he is all knowing, then he knew before hand. Which means if he knew before hand that I was going to be a non-believer, then he could have stopped me from being a non believer. Which means he's really not that nice of a god since he knew I was going to be a non believer and did nothing to fix it and now wants me to burn in hell. All for what? Not believing in a poorly written book written 2000 years ago. The same book that wants me to believe that an old guy built a REALLY REALLY big yacht and gathered every animal (except unicorns) and weathered a big rain storm. Of course, I'm sure he gathered up all 60,000 different types of beetles alone. Yep, makes sense.

by oneamazingwriter

those commandments and wound up breaking all of them. I met some people who were good natured and said they trusted God. They didn't shove anything at me. I watched them. I liked what they had. I got to a point where I felt lousy about myself and my life, so I went off alone and spoke aloud to whatever was out there and said, "I don't know who you are or what you are or even if you are. Would you please show me who you are and would you help me like you helped those other people?" That was over 28 years ago. My concept of God continues to expand as time passes. My brain can only hold so much. A teaspoon can hold water, but not the entire ocean all at once. I know that God is and that I am not God. I know that I can do many things now that I couldn't do before and that I have answers within that I didn't have before. I love the experience. I didn't read the Bible until 5 years into the experience and it was nice to see that there were others who had the same experience I did. I'm glad they left notes for me so that I could see that whether I ever met another person or not who had an experience like mine, people had that same experience a couple of thousand years ago. Same God...just different people.
I'm one of those "I'm from Missouri and I've gotta be shown" personalities. I continue to be shown each day. It's a neat experience!

edit: "gotten be shown" makes no sense at all! LOL
When you gotta...you gotta!

by tony hopkinson

would never have a problem with what your belief has done for you. I'm pleased for you.

Everyone needs something outside of themselves to believe in. It can be god, community, a philosophy, or in my case family.
What really annoys, is those who feel the need to bolster their own belief system by attempting to impose it on others.

As long as you don't do that, then the only concern is how your belief system motivates you to treat others.

by jardinier

of anyone who practises their faith peacefully.

I actually have a very strong faith, but few people can comprehend how I can have faith while not agreeing with the dogma.

There are Christians and there are "Christions," and you sound like one I would feel privileged to meet.

by dobbinsm

God gave everyone free will to accept or not to accept. The choice is yours. If He forces you, He is taking away that free will and becoming a dictator.

by deepsand

It does [b]not[/b], as most Christians mistakenly belief, state either that the "unsaved" are banished to "Hell" or even posit the [i]existence[/i] of "Hell."

What it [i]does[/i] say is that at some future time the dead will be resurrected; and, at that time, all, the then currently living and the recently resurrected, will be given the choice of eternal life in the "Heavenly Kingdom," on Earth, or eternal death!

There is no threat of eternal damnation & suffering, just the simple choice of life, subject to "God's" terms, or death.

As an aside, it should be noted that the beliefs of the Spirtualist churches are more akin to Eastern religions than to Christianity, even though they accept Jesus as being a highly significant person, namly the most powerful incarnate spirit yet witnessed by mortals.

by jardinier

I think perhaps that statement is some kind of oxymoron.

I totally disagree with you about what the Bible teaches about heaven and hell, but I have no intention of trying to prove it.

In an earlier post I have given the four instances in the Bible in which Jesus specifically mentions eternal damnation. You may not like the idea, but it's there in black and white.

I have discussed this issue in great detail at two Christian websites, where opinions were always supported by verses from Scripture. There IS a hell in Scripture.

If you feel that you can prove otherwise, by all means do so, supported by Biblical verses IN context.

The whole point of this discussion was to point out to people that although some mainstream churches never talk about the second coming and associated events, or life after death, it is an integral part of the doctrine.

by deepsand

Oxymoron? How so? How would you distinguish between the temporary death that spans the period between one's first incarnation and the resurrection, and a fianl, permanent death following the resurrection?

As to Biblical references re. hell, I assume that you are referring to the following:

"Matthew 23:33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

Matthew 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Mark 3:29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:

John 5:29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation."

Where here is there anything that supports the present Christian view of Hell, i.e. a physical place where one is subjected to live forever while being subjected to continuous physical torture?

What here is inconsistent with the view that hell is being subject to the ultimate punishment or damnation, that of being deprived of immortality?

by mjwx

[i]?Either Christianity is true, or it is the greatest fraud ever perpetrated upon human kind.?[/i]

Religion after a while takes on a life of it's own. Jules I believe this statement is null and void when we understand the role of religion in modern (western) society. Religion in Mid-Eastern society is used mainly as a method of control, as it was in used in western society so many hundreds of years ago (and this will be the last thing I will mention about Mid-Eastern religion in this post). Modern religion IMO is about more reassurance than an instruction manual to live by. What we believe will dictate our actions but our actions no longer seem to be in contrast with religious teachings. A person who drinks all night, commits adultery and would raise his fist against a fellow man (all in the same night) would be seen in church the very next morning to be "forgiven" for all he has done wrong according to the scriptures. it is this kind of hypocrisy that has lead me to believe that the power of god is no power at all (Nietzsche "god is dead").

To be forgiven of all your sins is far to easy, all you need to do is go to church put $5 in the pan and say hail mary. To an atheist like me I have to answer to myself in everything I do and I have to answer immediately, I don?t have the luxury of waiting to the afterlife for my judgement. At this point I will point out that there is a fair bit of ego-gratification involved here but it is limited to the amount an atheist can stomach. A "true believer" can commit as many sins as they like and be forgiven instantly by their nearest preacher. These people have no responsibility for their own action. At this point I will point out that I apply the "True Believer" stereotype to only the evangelical preachy types (the one's who call me a god damned communist heathen and demand that I ?believe?). Religion is too often used as an excuse for behaviour that should appal you. For evidence I point out the case of John List (here's the short version http://tinyurl.com/owvgl you can Google "john list" for more info).

Once again I don?t consider the average Christian to be like this. I don?t give open disrespect to someone else?s beliefs until they have shown it to mine but then its on for young and old. I will be respectful to a priest but that doesn?t mean I will take a sermon, its more of a "how's your day been padre".

I have tried to keep this post as non denominational as possible but no doubt someone will disagree with me and/or take offence. I don?t have the internet at home at the moment to I don?t know when i can reply but go ahead flame away.

by jardinier

I totally agree with your comment on "instant forgiveness," but the confession is not practised in Protestant churches.

It is practised in the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church.

However if you know that it is practised also by the evangelicals, I will take your word for that.

Like another atheist who usually contributes to religious discussions, your comments are logical, sensible and impartial, so I hope you add some more to the discussion when you next have access to a computer.

As for: "Modern religion IMO is about more reassurance than an instruction manual to live by, " that has always been the case.

However the core doctrine of Christianity, which runs continuously from Genesis to Revelation, is that God created us, we are imperfect, and "God" as Jesus washed clean the sins of all who accept this free gift, to the ultimate goal of going to heaven rather than hell.

by mjwx

Perhaps that was a poor choice of words. What I meant is unbiased or "I hate everyone equally and no group is more deserving of it than any other". Admittedly my post could easily be seen as decidedly anti-Christianbut but I do live in a predominantly Christian culture.

My knowledge of the behaviour of some evangelicals (It's fair to assume some are sincere) is from what I have seen myself (North-West of WA breeds a lot of stupid people) and what I have heard from reputable sources.

[i]As for: "Modern religion IMO is about more reassurance than an instruction manual to live by, " that has always been the case.[/i]

I don?t believe so. Up until recently (this century) the church has been able to effect laws in our country (and still does to a diminished extent). Many western legal systems originated around god (the US being a good example of this "all men under god" appears somewhere in the constriction). In the Mid-East Sharia law has easily taken hold. Sharia law is based around the teachings of the Koran as best I understand it.

Now about Sharia law, this is perpetuated by a bunch of cowards who enjoy projecting their power onto the weak and undefended. I refer specifically to the treatment of women in these countries (but also the way they treat heretics and non-believers). But then again it took a bloody great war (WWII) where all the men went off to fight before many western nations (US and women?s suffrage) realised that women can do the same job as men.

My outburst is not directed at Islam itself (as I said before I hate everyone equally) but to the actions perpetuated under its name.

by dobbinsm

The example you give of someone going out , getting drunk, comitting adultry and raising hid fist against a fellow man, is not a christian except by name. If you are a true christian and a follower of the word of God and a follower of God, then a person isn't going to go out there in the world and do these things. A true christian would strive to move away from these things and move to uplift and help their fellow citizens. Try to encourage and be an example of what they believe. And you can't justify yourself and 'buy' your forgiveness or even 'buy' your way in to heaven with offerings to the church.

I respect how you feel and think about this, I was the same way. I decided to find out for myself what God is all about and I haven't regretted it yet.

by jellimonsta

I believe most people get the depiction of eternity in Hell from Revelations.
Namely; Revelations 21:8.

"But to the fearful and unbelieving, and sinners, and those who make themselves abominable, and murderers, and fornicators, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, their part is in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone; which is the second death."

by jardinier

But that is the way hell has been portrayed throughout the history of Christianity.

The members of the Christian websites which I have been visiting recently most certainly believe that hell is a hot place.

by deepsand

In referring to the "Bible," I do [b]not[/b] mean the current version commonly cited by most Christions. Instead, I refer to the oldest known texts, prior to their having been carefully selected and edited fot inclusion into the "Christian Bible."

1) Subsequent translations have been less than faithful to the originals, not only with with regards to "Hell" and "eternal damnation," but with many others matters as well.

For the example, the oldest known documents do [b]not[/b] state that Mary was a [i]virgin[/i], but simply that she was a "[i]young woman of marrying age[/i]."

References to "Hell" have likewise been altered from the meanings of the origianl texts.

2) The early Christians, in an effort to improve their relationship with the Roman Empire, sought to distance themselves from the Jewish faith by deliberately modifying some of their publicly proclaimed positions, not to mention also adopting some of the trappings of pagan beliefs.

It is important to keep in mind that the 1st "Christians" were Jews, and therefore that then contempory writings must be read within the context of the time, not within that of current beliefs.

by jardinier

Matthew 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of [b]hell fire[/b].

Matthew 25:46 And these shall go away into [b]everlasting punishment[/b]: but the righteous into life eternal.

Mark 9:47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into [b]hell fire[/b]:

2 Thessalonians 1:9 Who shall be punished with [b]everlasting destruction[/b] from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

by oneamazingwriter

motivates me to see all of us as family, Tony, so our beliefs really aren't that far apart. Respect for personal boundaries within that family means a lot to me, since I like my boundaries (which afford me room to dance!). I need space to know my own joy. I accept that others need space to know theirs. What's nice is that we get to share from our sense of joy with one another.

by tony hopkinson

is an act if kindness. May be there's another person out there who could gain from faith in the way you have.

For me it would be an abrogation of everything in which I believe.

by jellimonsta

I actually kind of agree with you there DE. I believe God is an inclusive God.

As you said, I believe those who do not have the opportunity to know Jesus, will be given the opportunity to 'get in' the club. :D

However, I do not believe those who reject Jesus, but basically live a good, moral life, still have that same option.

If there were a 1001 ways to get into Heaven, God would not have sent His only son to earth to die for our sins. God knew it was the only way that He could allow us (who all fall short whether we regard ourselves sinners or not) to sit at His right hand in Heaven, and still be just in His Law. IMO.

by deadly ernest

I agree in that Jesus says I will prepare a place for you and the way to that place is by him. Thus is you ahve the opportunity to know Jesus and reject Jesus, through the use of your free will, then you have lost your room reservation and not goign to get there. But it is also clear that those who have no opportunity to know Jesus will be given an opportunity to reach heaven - those who die too young, those who preceeded Jesus on this earthly realm, those who live in areas where the gospel of Jesus is not taught.

The other good thing about the saviour's redemption is that having accepted Jesus he will make up any shortfall in heavenly room rent as long as we try to do what he wants us to do - not I said try, as in make an honest effort.

by Member 25348569

for the two days extra on my weekend. :D

I will be going to church on Monday - a Catholic Church, no less. No, I'm not relapsing back to religion, my nephew is marrying a Catholic girl. I haven't much knowledge of what they do in a Church of England church, let alone a Catholic one. Do they have the same hymns?

I suppose I'll find out...

Neil ]:)

by jellimonsta

Although, if it is a full service wedding, get ready to do a lot of standing up and sitting back down, standing up, sitting back down! :D

Don't worry about not joining in with Hymns and prayers, most of the guests probably won't anyway! :p

by jardinier

Hi Neil. As Jelli says, the hymns, order of service and so forth should be quite similar to the Anglican.

I attended my first Catholic mass at the age of 42, to please a female friend. There were three distinct differences from Protestant services.

1. The congregation didn't get to drink the wine.

2. There were two collections.

3. The priest didn't wait to shake hands with the parishioners as they left the church. In fact he was nowhere to be seen and the people dispersed and scurried off as quickly as possible.

I actually had a friend a while back who was a Catholic and an anti-Protestant. He did not approve of the coffee, bikkies and chat after church.

At the various churches I have attended, both the ministers and congregation quickly accepted the fact that I only showed up for the coffee, bikkies and chat.

I play hymns on the organ at home, and can sing karaoke hymns online if I choose. So I explained to the rector of the last church I attended -- who was known for his long, obscure sermons -- that I could enjoy the music and hymns at home, and avoid the sermons and collections.

But we had an understanding.

I tested on him a joke I made up: How do you decline (as in grammar) a horny, homosexual priest?

Rector, rectum, erectus.

He responded with an avalanche of really funny Bible jokes, but said he did not have time to write them down to me.

But don't worry, Neil. Non-God will be looking down on you as you undergo your baptism of Catholicism.

by faradhi

As I stated in another discussion, IMHO, we tend to take all religion too literally and seriously. So, I make the following statements not intending to offend but instead to keep a little humor in the converstation.

I believe God has a sence of humor. How do I know this? Look at the Duckbilled platerpus. Talk about getting Darwin. Also, My wife told me that she once prayed to God to let her marry a boy named "Bryan" she had a crush on. God sent her Me! :D

There are three western religions (broken into various sects) that all have different points of view of what happened in the beginning of the first century. Additionally, the a lot of the Sects of each religion will have a different point of view.

I am not a religious scholar. I am sure I have proven this by my comments in both the religious discussions I have participated in. Therefore, what I have learned is that there is no way anyone can prove that any interpertation, of the writings is, the absolute correct one.

So what am I left with. First, all the three religions that talk about that time in history believe in One God the creator, that will send a messiah. One believes that has happened, two are still waiting. (I think Muslims are still waiting, I may be wrong.)

Second, other than some do's and don'ts, like eating pork or meat on fridays and the like, all can be boiled down to Be Nice, Play well with others, Help those who need help, and Believe in God.

Again, I am not a religious scholar (I know that because my pastor never used the phrase Be Nice as scripture), But as I understand it, as long as I do those things, I am set. Since, other than the believe in God part, I would do all those things as an atheist, it seems simple enough. Second, as long as I never stray from believing in God. I am set. It also means that I have to constantly reevaluate my intent and beliefs. Making sure am not moving away from God.

So in summation, I believe.

Share, Be Nice, Play well with others, and follow the golden rule.

All the other stuff religion adds to the mix is a means to an end not the ONLY means to an end. It is periphery. Your relationship with God is paramount, the manner you get there is largely meaningless.

God knows what we need and we just need to pray for his guidance and if praying to marry someone be sure you can point at them or no telling what you will get.

Just my two cents.

by jardinier

For starters, to a very large degree a person's religion is a matter of geography. A person born into a Christian, Muslim, Hindu or Buddhist etc family and environment will in most cases continue in the religion in which they have been raised.

Since the days of conversion by the sword or musket, there has been very little cross-conversion between the major religions.

A glaring exception to this rule, for which I do not have any explanation, is South Korea -- a formerly totally Buddhist country which is now (according to my Korean friends) about 50 per cent Christian.

I would most certainly agree that atheists and agnostics can live and exhibit the highest of moral and ethical standards.

HOWEVER, there is obviously an innate desire for humans to identify with a particular and exclusive group, and so we get the denominations and sects within a particular religion.

It is my belief/observation that most people NEED this because they don't have the time, inclination or ability to answer the big questions for themselves. They need to be TOLD what to believe, and if it is different to what other people believe, then all the better because this gives them a feeling of security [My group is the only true group], and self-righteousness.

To my way of thinking this is pandering to the intellect and nothing whatsoever to do with actually wanting or requiring a genuine religious experience.

Although it has taken me half a lifetime of sweat and stress to arrive at my current perspective, I feel very privileged in that I don't need to identify with ANY belief system.

I have great faith in a higher power, but have no need to define it or understand it.

by deadly ernest

after the war, large numbers of Christian groups helped with the rebuilding, many set up orphanges and schools. The large UN (mostly USA) presence for some years also added to this as they were involved in the rebuilding. Many Koreans saw these good works and asked why they did it and some felt that the helping was due to their belief, as it was for many, and decided to become Christians. These then saw to enlighten their countrymen.

by faradhi

I would not argue with anything you stated.

I have observed that with the exception of certain Do's and Don'ts that Christian, Muslim and Jews have very similar beliefs. I take those similarities as truth. Just like when a crime occurs in a crowd of people. All the stories will be different because they will be filter through different experiences, but usually there are similarities that explain what happened.

It is true that religion is largely an accident of birth. I identify as Roman Catholic because that is how I was raised. I do not ask for intercession from Saints. Why, when I can go straight to the top. I do not take communion. I do not believe in transubstantiation. There is a lot of other doctrine that I disagree with. I have tried other churches and find myself uncomfortable. So just like I am more comfortable in Docker than Haggar pants, I go to the Roman Catholic Church rather than the Southern Baptist Church.

I also go to church out of respect my mother's wishes. She used to say, "Is it too hard to give an hour a week to God." I used to argue that I give much more than that over the entire week. Finally, I go to church because I reaffirm physically something I know spiritually. It is more of a weekly reminder that I need to take time. Not just on Sunday but Everyday.

I do not see any religion except satanism as wrong. It seems to me that it stands to reason that since God created great diversity in world, he would be just as diverse in how he presented himself. I see satanism as wrong because they believe God exists and selected to reject him and all his works.

Religion to me is different from spirituality. Spirituality is the true communion with God. Religion should be teaching that communion. Many do some do not. I do not condemn a religion because of the actions of some of the people in that religion. Some go out of fear, some go out of love, some go for God, some go for themselves. I am not the judge of why people go. Judgement is God's job.

by onbliss

You said "There are three western religions". Infact they should be 'middle-eastern religions" geopgraphically speaking.

by faradhi

You are correct.
I just wanted to excude the eastern religions. I guess a better way to say it would have been except eastern religions. Oh well. NitPick away.

by jardinier

I have never been able to reconcile the general theme of Jesus' teaching -- love, acceptance, forgiveness -- with ANY kind of eternal damnation -- hot or otherwise.

by x-marcap

If Mary was that age, and alive (she'd have been killed/put away for being nuts/ no longer marriage qualified) Haven't you heard of Jewish stone ball? Women who were adultererers, or prostitutes, immoral were risking their lives... She was a virgin even if the Either the Greek or Hebrew text would call her "young woman of marrying age." I am referring to Greek Manuscripts, and to Hebrew translations from an Interlinear.

You are repeating gnostic arguments from 190 AD.
They were stomped out once before. It is a deliberate mis-translation from my understanding of the culture and the times.

by deepsand

Adultry, within the context of time in which the Ten Commandments where reputedly set forth, was the sexual union between a [i]married[/i] woman and a man not her husband.

Such acts involving an [i]unmarried[/i] woman were [b]not[/b] adultry.

Therefore, Mary, would not have been an adultress solely by virtue of not having been a virgin at the time of her marriage to Joseph.

Contrary to your claim, the phrase "young woman of marrying age" was [b]not[/b] synonymous with "virgin."

by jardinier

which you apparently intend to push until I agree with you. Well I don't agree with you and I will quickly get bored if you keep repeating the some information.

Oxymoron? How about "Eternal" = for ever and ever and ever; and "Death" = once only - KAPUT - worm food. Ashes to ashes, and dust to dust. There is nothing eternal about our molecules being dispersed in the soil. We cease to exist as entities.

I am fully aware of the Scriptures you are referring to, so you are not telling me anything I don't already know. [1 Corinthians 15:50 - 53]

You have no doubt VERY CAREFULLY selected Biblical passages that do not refer to "hot." Here are a couple that do:

Matthew 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of [b]hell fire.[/b]

Mark 9:47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into [b]hell fire:[/b]

So you are being deliberately devious in choosing only passages that do not mention "hot." Obviously you know Scripture well enough to KNOW that the references to "Hot" are there.

What is the Christian view of Hell? What is the Biblical view of Hell? What do individual Christians believe about Hell?

OBVIOUSLY, whether true or false, during MOST OF THE HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY "Hell" has been taught to mean a place of everlasting punishment, in a very hot environment.

Check some of the paintings by the old masters that depict it as such.

As for immortality, you can keep it. My personal idea of "hell" would be to spend all eternity in the company of self-righteous know-it-all Christians.

IF there is an afterlife -- which for Christians is a mere belief -- I will take my chances.

If you really are prepared to test your beliefs with other Christians -- some of whom are quite scholarly I should warn you -- then I invite you to join this free website where these issues are debated exhaustively:

http://meetchristians.com

by deepsand

We seem to have a mis-understanding here. I am [b]not[/b] supporting any particular religious beliefs. If I've implied otherwise, I do apologize for my failure to make myself clear.

And, I did not select any particular Scriptural passages; rather, I responded only to those posted by you.

What I [b]am[/b] saying is that that particular interpretation of "hell" as put forth by [b]some[/b] Christians, i.e. that it is a place where the "damned" are eternally physically tortured, is [b]not the only interpretation allowed [/b] by the extant Scriptural texts.

As for immortality, I suspect that I personally might find such to be as much curse as blessing.

May the future be kind.

by stand fast

The basics of the gospel of Jesus Christ is this from the Apostle Paul, Acts 17:24-31 24?God, who made the world and everything in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands. 25?Nor is He worshiped with men?s hands, as though He needed anything, since He gives to all life, breath, and all things. 26?And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings, 27?so that they should seek the Lord, in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; 28?for in Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said, ?For we are also His offspring.? 29?Therefore, since we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man?s devising. 30?Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent, 31?because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead.?

This "one Man" spoken of is The Lord Jesus Christ. By faith trust Him or trust yourself. This is how the faith is worked out in day to day life; follow His Way or your own way. God wants a relationship with everyone but has made it through accepting His Son/Word "the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world". As commonly said "it not what you know, it's who you know"....
For futher information read the B.I.B.L.E. - Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth startinng in the book of John, chapter 1 verse 1.

by unclerob

the burning in "hellfire" notion is an entirely made up human idea, God, Jesus & the holy ghost would never waste time and spend energy on such a task, only humans could come up with an idea like because that is human nature. Could you really see the Father of creation handing out punishment to a mere human, what would be the point, isn't that like someone purposely stepping on ant, overkill to say the least especially for a God of Love.

True christianity as known by real christians will let you know that God loves you, he knows you more than you know yourself. You also don't get to heaven or to God except by way of Jesus, he died to take away the sins of the world, not just at that time of his death but for all time. That's what sets Christianity apart from other religions. God sent his only son to be with us for a short period of time and in his omniscience he knew and so did Jesus that he would be sacrificing his son's mortal life to take away the sins of the world - it's the ultimate sacrifice - what other sacrifice could be greater? Jesus knew what he was doing also, I'm sure he could see all of time when he made that decision and he knew that people would be questioning the existence of himself & God in the future but he still died for all of our sins. He is not a God of vengeance that I know of, but one of love. From what I know, when you pass away and leave your mortal bonds, your soul will laid to rest, God will then choose whether or not you have enternal life in heaven or if your existence ends at that point. No river of fire, no devil to place a pitch fork in your side for all of eternity, these are all dramatics used to scare people into obeying God, unfortunately it doesn't work. Like anything else of value, if Love isn't given freely from one person to another or from you to God, it is not worth anything. If you are scared into believing God because of the colorful imagery of hellfire or river of fire bullchips and didn't just believe in him with the faith of a real christian which means you weren't coerced into this action then how much is your belief really worth?

This is a very interesting discussion, I expect to follow & read this one to see what everyone's viewpoints are, let the great debate begin!

- just my 0.02 cents cdn, feel free to agree/disagree.

by onbliss

...is'nt the idea - God's son - human in nature too? For that matter even the terms "Father" and "Ghost" are human.

by stand fast

We can put and end to the dabate now if thats what your looking for or possibly your just a little under informed. Seriously. I know a lot of Christians just run around and say "Jesus loves you" and yes this is true in that He loved His creation enough to lay down His life for them for the penality of there sin. But He also said "if your not for me you are by default against me", my paraphrased Matthew 12:30 which leads me to your quote.

The quote "the burning in "hellfire" notion is an entirely made up human idea, God, Jesus & the holy ghost would never waste time and spend energy on such a task, only humans could come up with an idea like because that is human nature. Could you really see the Father of creation handing out punishment to a mere human, what would be the point, isn't that like someone purposely stepping on ant, overkill to say the least especially for a God of Love."

Now let the Word of God the bible defuse this debate in Revelation 19:15-21, "15Now out of His mouth goes a sharp sword, that with it He should strike the nations. And He Himself will rule them with a rod of iron. He Himself treads the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. 16And He has on His robe and on His thigh a name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.
17Then I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the birds that fly in the midst of heaven, ?Come and gather together for the supper of the great God, 18?that you may eat the flesh of kings, the flesh of captains, the flesh of mighty men, the flesh of horses and of those who sit on them, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, both small and great.? 19And I saw the beast, the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against Him who sat on the horse and against His army. 20Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone. 21And the rest were killed with the sword which proceeded from the mouth of Him who sat on the horse. And all the birds were filled with their flesh."

Enough said? Uncle Bob, God does love (commited to) His creation in so that whosoever accepts His Son/Word will not perish but have eternal life and if you don't the above has explained. It a hard word, but God demonstrates His mercy towaeds us by giving us a way out, the Scapegoat His Son Jesus.

by unclerob

It's Uncle Rob, not "Bob",
Rob is actually short for Roberto, not Bobby.

When I have time to look up your source and reply back I will, you made a good post and I will take some time to reflect on it and get back to you with a reply.

by Member 25348569

One of the things that Christians seem to think is important about Jesus is that (in your words) "He loved His creation enough to lay down His life for them". But he didn't. He was a god and no way was he going to die with all of the implications of what that [b]really[/b] means. Anyway you cut it, if you're walking around the place three days after "dying" then you didn't really "lay down your life". Explain, please.

The "Father of Creation" has done some pretty nasty things down the ages so why the problem imagininng such a being could create Hell. An example - and there are many more: To a non-believer such as myself, whatever the human activity that prompted the Flood, it was a bit of an overreaction (British understatement). Explain, please.

Isn't it about time that you Christians stopped coming up with this cryptic biblical bollocks that you seem to be able to use to justify anything. You quote "He Himself treads the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God." What on earth does [b]that[/b] mean and why should such a "nice" god display "fierceness and wrath" which, as we are his creations, is all his fault? Explain, please.

The problem with Christianity and like faiths/beliefs/delusions/whatevers is that nobody seems to think it through. An example: What do you believe makes you...well...you? Me? I don't profess to understand consciousness and how it works. The finer nuances of Cognitive Theory are beyond my wit to appreciate but what I do know is that I, like every other human, am a combination of neurolgical activity and chemical activity. Which bit of that is the soul? Will there be a continuation of consciousness for you when you are drawn up in The Rapture? Will the chemical bit get left behind? Without the hormonal influences, are you truly you? Hey! Some of you think you get new bodies, don't you? How long do they last coz eternity is a pretty long time?

Talking of eternity. Eternity is a concept totally beyond the understanding of the wisest of us, Christian or not. Don't you think it's going to get a little "samey" after a googlplex of years? Or is god going to limit your consciousness to just sitting there with your mouth open worshipping? Pretty damn shallow.

by x-marcap

Jewish stone ball was not just for the married woman...

In fact the Jews had been in trouble with the Romans and weren't supposed to execute people...
but they did...

by deadly ernest

In the early days the Jews used to hunt down and kill the Christians, and help the pagan Romans do that too. Later Christains returned the favour. That does not make either set of actions right.

Mind you anti-semitism also covers Arabs and Muslims as well as Jews.

The real truth of the actions that you mention above is that people with a hunger for wealth and power actually did things to hurt the Jews to enlarge their wealth and power - they did this by talking up lies about the Jews. BTW the Inquisition took in more than just Spain, that was just where it was the worst and they also killed many Christians who they saw as heretical. Touch and go if they killed more Christians than Jews - no one is really sure as the exact figures were not kept.

Regarding dear old Adolph - he was a communist and the National Socialist Party was just a variant of Marxist communism with a touch of Lennonism and Stalinism but aimed at one nation taking over the world instead of international communism. Adolph may have been born a Christian but he was not a practicing Christian and actually denounced all religions during his days as a communist commisar in Vienna.

During the holocaust Adolph caused millions of people to be killed, Jews, Muslims and Christians. The vast majority of the Romany people that he had murdered were Christians, and he killed a much higher percentage of them than he did Jews. He came closer to exterminating the Romany people than he did the Jews, yet we see little of that - as they were a small ethnic group after Stalin had done his best at exterminating them in the 1930's. Amrka nd Stalin also had a go at killing off the Jews in the 1920's and 1930's.

Religion is the teachings put forth by various prophets etc. God gave us all the free will to do as we wish. You should blame the people who distort the teachings to their own ends, both those within and without the church itself (whatever church that is).

To blame God for the actions of Stalin and Hitler is like blaming you for the actions of your son when he is 35. You wish to blame the father for the actions of the grown son - not reasonable.

by tony hopkinson

ROTFLMAO

Come out with that one at a neo-nazi rally. Before you go, leave an address for flowers.

Adolf was no more of a communist than Vladimir or Joseph.

His socialist policy such as it was was to promise work for the german people during the Weimar period. Making bombs and cracking them ff mainly. As they didn't have any work this was popular.

Then he carried on the volk mysticism of the fatherland the Kaiser had used at the end of WWI to prove the rightness of german superiority.

He was a great orator, a demagogue supreme and an unprincipalled opportunist, but a communist, no way.

His attacks on the jews were based on them beinga a successful social elite and different. He directed german rage at the uniquely stupid treaty of versaille at them. They enjoyed the release, they enjoyed the exertion of control, he gave them a meaning and then floated into power on their gratitude, where upon he turned into a real bad b'stard.

Don't set me off on the church in WWII.

They supported and abetted Hitler and his regime, actively or passively. They did it in fear of their lives, which makes all the crap they spouted when sending off young boys to get shot, burnt, dismembered and blown to pieces in the service of germany even less palatable.

The catholic church in particular could have hurt Hitler and Mussolini very badly, they didn't, so yet again they were guilty of not practicing what they preach.

by Member 25348569

I was up close to your neck of the woods for a wedding in Bradford. It was a Catholic Church do and I'm feeling a bit stressed and anti-religious after keeping quiet all the way through.

Black pudding for breakfast in the hotel in Otley - cracking! Drove back across Ilkley Moor through Huddersfield, Holmfirth and across the moor to Glossop then down across the High Peaks. Nice countryside you've got but I'm a bit underwhelmed with Leeds...

by mjwx

The two ideologies are worlds apart. Fascism is ultra right-wing while communism is ultra left-wing.

Hitler was also a staunch anti-communist/anti-marxist. So much so prior to the war he was trying as hard as he could to ally with Britain against Stalin. Good thing the Poms wouldn?t have a bar of it.

by unclerob

You raise a very good point and you obviously have a lot more knowledge on this topic than I could ever offer but let me ask you this... do you blame the gun for killing someone or do you blame the man for firing the gun against someone, or do you blame the man who invented the gun?

How people use religion to satisfy their own needs (most of the time selfish) & justify their actions isn't the religion itself, it's how people choose to use & interpret that religion.

by Member 25348569

I was suggesting that anti-semitism that has been endemic in Continental Europe and Russia for the last millenium is mainly down to the Christian Church, Catholic and Orthodox. Without the longstanding anti-semitism of Germany and, especially, Poland, the Holocaust would not have been so easy to justify, perpetrate and hide.

Ernest, above, made some points about the Jews persecuting Christians but, really, I think we can dismiss what he had to say were we to weigh up one hundred years of Jewish "persecution" of the Christian against seventeen or eighteen hundred years of revenge by a religion that boasts about its capacity to love! Oh. And Adolf Hitler was born and raised a Catholic and no amount of Christian propaganda can make that untrue.

Alas, the "Gun" analogy is really a little too simplistic for me to bother with, [b]and[/b] I live in a society where guns are not common!

Religion is a lot more complicated and a lot less rational than a gun. I'm not necessarily saying that any of the larger Church sects are still doing nasties on the rest of us but the last two thousand years have had their effect on the society that we have today and not all of it good.

Neil

p.s. I'm Welsh, not Jewish, by the way...

by deepsand

As such, it but one more way to rationalize man's inate irrationality.

And, under the right circumstances, it can be used to exert great power.

Nonetheless, it is not religion itself that does harm, but rather those who choose to so use it.

by deepsand

You are still attempting to define "adultry" by the particular standards of a particular people at an arbitrary point in time & place.

I am referring to the definition at the time the Ten Commandments were set forth. Within the context of discussions of Christianity, that is the pertinent definition.

by mjwx

officially condoned Hitler?s acts, they never spoke out against it which in my mind is just as bad. Why one may ask, the church is centred in Rome and Rome was on the axis side. A simple act of self preservation, I have no doubt in my mind Hitler would have disposed of priests in the same fashion as Jews had it come down to it.

I don?t believe not acting makes one guilty as a rule but every rule has an exception and I find this to be one. I also do not blame the church for hitler's actions but I blame the church for failing to act when it should have.

Neil, as for blaming god I have came to the same conclusion as Nietzsche ?God is Dead?.

by Member 25348569

don't accept it as either appropriate or relevant. Religion is a lot more complex than any tool and to attempt to describe it as such - as he tried with the gun analogy - just doesn't work for me at any level.

Religion is a belief system, an abstract entity, unlike the concrete entity of a gun. If, in the name of any religion, a group of people commit acts that are ethically unacceptable either to the main population of the time or to future generations then that religion and its imposed moral code is to blame. [b}Somebody[/b] has to take the blame for the atrocities - big and small - carried out in the name of one religion or another.

My particular point about the Christian religion is that has emphasised - each sect to a greater or lesser extent - "love", "forgiveness", etc and most then proceeded, at one time or another, to conspicuously ignore this.

by jardinier

was to suggest that if in fact Jesus DOES NOT return, following which people (both deceased and living) will be dispatched to either Heaven or Hell (predestined or otherwise) then Christianity falls off its self-appointed pedestal as the ONLY TRUE RELIGION and becomes merely an ethical system enveloped in a mass of mumbo-jumbo and mythology.

It would drop lower on the ladder of spiritual philosophies than, say, Buddhism, which has an excellent ethical system and DOES promise enlightenment through self-effort.

The "enlightenment" promised by Christianity comes in two stages: (1) Being filled with the Holy Spirit -- "born again" and (2) immortality.

What does set Christianity apart from (I believe) all other religions is the strong emphasis on "forgiveness."

Now for the $64 million question. Has Christianity attracted many/most of its converts because NO PERSONAL EFFORT is required to reap the benefits of salvation? Just accept the notion (myth?) that Jesus died for your sins, and you can continue on to be as imperfect as you choose and still be ?saved.?

The fact that both Christianity and Islam have spread all around the globe to become the two most followed religions in the world, can be simply explained by the fact that they both stress evangelism and more specifically, proselytism.

In the current world situation Islam is showing itself to be a religion which espouses to some degree VIOLENCE.

While Christians counter this with a claim of peacefulness, in the context of the whole history of both religions it might be hard to determine which was the more violent.

Both Christianity and Islam have colonised or infiltrated most parts of the world, initially through VIOLENCE.

Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism and various other smaller religions have not been noticeably evangelistic or proselytizing.

However Buddhism was largely ignored in the country of its birth, India, but spread peaceably to become the predominant religion in Eastern Asia.

Jews have spread around the globe partly because of persecution, and partly because of opportunism.

So I have suggested that Christianity may be fraudulent in that the promises by which it has won its converts, are more than likely nothing more than pie in the sky.

[i][Disclaimer: The opinions and suggestions expressed herein are not necessarily those of the author, but are presented to encourage debate and discussion][/i]

by onbliss

You said:
"However Buddhism was largely ignored in the country of its birth, India, but spread peaceably to become the predominant religion in Eastern Asia."

It was not really ***ignored*** in India. I feel this because of the following:

1) Some of the earliest and prominent Sutras belonging to Buddhism were composed in India. The Pali and Mahayana Sutras are just two I would like to mention here.

2) The disciples of the Saakya Muni (Muni = Sage/rishi, Saakya = Clan of Gautama, meaning), had great discourses and debates against the Vedic sages/debaters. Probably you are aware the Upanishads forms the spiritual component of the Vedas. They won some battles and lost many. They just could not beat them.

3)Many Hindus consider Gautama's preachings to fill in some of the gaps of the Upanishadic teachings.

4)Some of the Hindus even consider him to be one of the avatars of Vishnu. And that is a very unique and reverred position to occupy.

5)Inspite of the raging debates (meaning oppositions from the Vedic proponents - predominantly Brahmins), Buddhism flourished and spread to the the different corners of India. There were several Indian kings who became Buddhists. But in the pluralistic fabric of India, the King's religion was not enforced on his subjects.

But Buddhism was not ***ignored*** in India. Some of its thoughts were inculcated in to the existing thought processes, and then it just died a natural death over a period of time. Because several others saw it as an extension to Hinduism.

Though there existed some enemity in certain quarters, to a good extent Buddhism along with Jainism co-existed and supplemented/complemented Hinduism.

The modern Buddhism could be much different from the Buddhims that existed in the ancient India.

You might want to read Swami Vivekanada's talk about Buddhism that he addressed to "Parliament of Religions, Chicago" on 26th September 1893.

Edited: The spelling of clan.

by stand fast

The new covenant that Jesus brought forward put forth faith rather than works (religion). Yes it does seem contrite to say "you are saved by faith" and then "repent". The bible says "that we are saved by faith unto good works".

I know from my own experience at the time of my conversion (born-again) it was just totally a God thing. One minute I was a slave to sin the next a slave rightousness. It was a total blast seriously how the Spirit of God can turn you around. I was he poster-boy for sex, drugs and rock'n'roll, the next broken before God for the devastation of my actions, for the damage I caused in lives of others as well as my own. The Holy Spirit turned a light on to "sin" and pain it causes. Thats why I say I was a slave to sin, thats all I knew and thats what I did, but when the liberty of the Holy Spirit comes it set you free.... It's hard to explain, but I have experienced it and it's the best....I'm free, free to be who God really intended to be and this fredom causes you to want to be obedient to God and His Word. Not by a law but by love. My favorite scripture is "it's for freedom He (Jesus) has set us free. Galatians 5:1. Free to forgive, free to praise God, free from bitterness, free from the weight of guilt.

It does take faith to follow Jesus no doubt about it, start walking with Him and you will see.

As for the qoute at the start "The purpose of this discussion was to suggest that if in fact Jesus DOES NOT return, following which people (both deceased and living) will be dispatched to either Heaven or Hell (predestined or otherwise) then Christianity falls off its self-appointed pedestal as the ONLY TRUE RELIGION and becomes merely an ethical system enveloped in a mass of mumbo-jumbo and mythology."
The apostle Paul said a similar thing in that "if Christ did not rise then our preaching is in vain" "And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; you are still in your sins. 1 Corinthians 15:14&17. So the $64,000 question is, do you beleive Jesus is alive?

I could answer that but I'll let you...

by deepsand

A [i]religion[/i] is a [i]system of beliefs[/i]. Those [i]beliefs[/i] are accepted on [i]faith[/i].

Therefore, Christianity [b]is[/b] a [b]religion[/b].

Furthermore, being "born again" does [b]not[/b] make your beliefs anymore "real" than those of others.

Nice try, but self-pronounced "truthes" simply won't work.

==================================================

Main Entry: [b]faith[/b]
Pronunciation: 'fAth
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural faiths /'fAths, sometimes 'fA[th]z/
Etymology: Middle English feith, from Old French feid, foi, from Latin fides; akin to Latin fidere to trust -- more at BIDE
1 a : allegiance to duty or a person : LOYALTY b (1) : fidelity to one's promises (2) : sincerity of intentions
2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
3 : something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs
synonym see [b]BELIEF[/b]

--------------------------------------------------

Main Entry: [b]re?li?gion [/b]
Pronunciation: ri-'li-j&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English religioun, from Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back -- more at RELY
1 a : the state of a religious b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
4 : a cause, principle, or [b]system of beliefs[/b] held to with ardor and faith

by deepsand

In fact, the overwhelming portion of hypocritical acts are [i]non[/i]-religious in nature.

It is simply that [i]institutionalized[/i] hypocrisy, whether by or in the name of a group, generally occurs on a wider public scale, and is ever so more visble.

by unclerob

or if you believe in another religion or do you believe at all?

Wouldn't you grant that there may be questions that even science cannot explain without the possible existence of God? (maybe you wouldn't but hear me out just the same)

- the universe's existence must have a suitable cause, was it created? If not, how did it get here?
- What governs the laws and constants of physics? Are such laws the product of random chance or have they been designed?

- man's ideas of god & man's built-in sense of right and wrong come from an innate awareness of a supreme being/God and a code of law, are these built-in ideas just a random occurrence or do they suggest that we have some connection to God

Hugh Ross, an astrophysicist, has written alot of this very subject, I quote him since he is a man of science first and objective by default. He says that "time is that dimension in which cause and effect phenomena take place. . . . If time's beginning is concurrent with the beginning of the universe, as the space-time theorem says, then the cause of the universe must be some entity operating in a time dimension completely independent of and pre-existent to the time dimension of the cosmos. This conclusion is powerfully important to our understanding of who God is and who or what God isn't. It tells us that the creator is transcendent, operating beyond the dimensional limits of the universe. It tells us that God is not the universe itself, nor is God contained within the universe.
These are two very popular views, which brings us to something very significant metaphysically or philosophically. If the big bang theory is true, then we can conclude God is not the same as the universe (a popular view) and God is not con-tained within the universe (another popular view)."

Leon Lederman, a Nobel Prize winner was quoted as saying the following: "In the very beginning, there was a void, a curious form of vacuum, a nothingness containing no space, no time, no matter, no light, no sound. Yet the laws of nature were in place and this curious vacuum held potential. A story logically begins at the beginning, but this story is about the universe and unfortunately there are no data for the very beginnings--none, zero. We don't know anything about the universe until it reaches the mature age of a billion of a trillionth of a second. That is, some very short time after creation in the big bang. When you read or hear anything about the birth of the universe, someone is making it up--we are in the realm of philosophy. Only God knows what happened at the very beginning."

Doesn't the fact that these members of the science community along with many other noted members showing some sort of belief in a supreme being/entity/God lend any credence to the possibility of God existing? Or are these physicists just full of horse manure just like the environmental scientists that believe in global warming?

p.s. I also believe that global warming is for real.

by Member 25348569

To take the last point first. Obviously there are unanswered questions about everything from the very small to the very large and from the Beginning to the End. I do, however, not consider it in any way meaningful to trot out even such intellectual giants as Einstein, Hawking and your selection, Leon Lederman as proof of anything. Just because the reach of each of these scientist has, at sometime in their lives, exceeded their mental grasp is not a reason to retreat into superstition or mysticism. From them, a simple, honest "I don't know" would suffice followed, hopefully, by "Someone will find out".

Hugh Ross, on the other hand, is a Creationist Hack and wouldn't recognise objectivity if it chewed his leg off at the knee. :p

As for your questions...

The Universe and how it got here and where it will go? I hope I live long enough to find out. Cosmology is a very young science and I'm willing to give it a real go before I capitulate into "God done it" and give up asking.

The laws of physics? Why would you believe they are not chance? If you want to take me on in a argument for and against Intelligent Design then be prepared to put some efort into finding your arguments. To stop reading Ross would be a good start.

Man's built-in sense of right and wrong? Why do you believe that this in any way indicates a god? As far as I can see, we behave the way we do because of a number of different factors of which a couple are our empathy - we understand and wouldn't like it done to us so we don't do it - and laws - we've agreed that most of us don't like it so we'll make sure that nobody does it. Hopefully, we end up with a code of ethics to which we all subscribe rather than the imposition of a moral code inappropriate for a significant number. If you wish to examine the Ten Commandments as a foundation for a god-given moral code, the first four are totally inappropriate when applied to a non-believer such as me, for instance.

I wouldn't admit this where Max could read it but, although I'm still unsure about the true scope and magnitude of Global Warming and whether we are the cause of some or all, as it would do no harm to concentrate on renewable energy, husbanding resources, and so on, I'm on the side of doing something to improve the sustainability of our civilisation.

The original post - a little snippy, I admit - was aimed at contentscreen and his hyperdidactic post. I don't want to necessarily get into an argument with you for any reason other than because I enjoy debate (more so if its heated) and sometimes I feel a little guilty when its a religious debate because, by definition, it doesn't mean anywhere near as much to me as it might to you. You seem like a nice guy, Rob, so if you don't want to answer this and tell me to bugger off, I really will understand. :D

Neil ]:)