Religious Sanctuary Thread

Just because you "tend to prefer to think" it doesn't make it true.
Of course not, silly. Your refusal to accept any kind of prescriptive belief system likewise doens't make them untrue.

...nor do I subscribe to any belief, philosophy or doctrine that claims to have such absolute truth all worked out
I would doubt that any Christian would claim to personally know all truths. We claim only that Jesus is truth. God would be the only one who knows all truth, as you said.

There's no basis upon which we can assume that which is passed down to us from other humans is fact until we see it for ourselves.
Similar to the point of why I said that religion is a personal thing. Christians use the Bible, though, as a basis for our belief. Other religions have texts as well. You have even cited ones regarding the Hindu religion, which holds a different theory than monotheism, as you've said before.

Just which is the lie told many times? Indeed, we must decide for ourselves, don't we? Christians seems to get beat up here for believing our particular 'lie'. If only we could be more discerning, like the more enlightened members of the JC.

Maybe Moraxella catharralis or Pseudomonas aeruginosa do have emotions. My statement in any case was meant for the existence of such, not the fact that all of creation may or may not possess them.

Personally, I would like to see posts on various beliefs. I fear the way this thing has gone, however, presents a less than hospitable atmosphere for those who might otherwise like to express their religious views. I feel that I would be enriched by it, and do invite people to please start doing so.

Edit: forgot to use question marks. [Yoda]How embarassing.[/Yoda]

 

Of course not, silly. Your refusal to accept any kind of prescriptive belief system likewise doens't make them untrue.

Exactly. I didn't say they're untrue on the basis of my refusal to accept them. I simply said I don't accept them.

I would doubt that any Christian would claim to personally know all truths. We claim only that Jesus is truth. God would be the only one who knows all truth, as you said.

If there is a god, for that matter.

Similar to the point of why I said that religion is a personal thing. Christians use the Bible, though, as a basis for our belief. Other religions have texts as well. You have even cited ones regarding the Hindu religion, which holds a different theory than monotheism, as you've said before.

I have never said Hinduism wasn't monotheistic. It is. It is both monotheistic and henotheistic... but not polytheistic.

Just which is the lie told many times? Indeed, we must decide for ourselves, don't we? Christians seems to get beat up here for believing our particular 'lie'. If only we could be more discerning, like the more enlightened members of the JC.

What goes around comes around... The "beating" Christians get nowadays is nothing compared to the beatings their predecessors had mercilessly doled out over the centuries because of hatred, fear and ignorance of other cultures, races and religions.

Granted, one can't change the past... but we control the direction of the future by our actions. Maybe this backlash will encourage Christians to be more conscientious and respectful of other cultures from now on.

Maybe Moraxella catharralis or Pseudomonas aeruginosa do have emotions. My statement in any case was meant for the existence of such, not the fact that all of creation may or may not possess them.

Is it more plausible that god created man in his image, or that man created god in his image? I find the latter to be more plausible... considering how we have a history for anthropomorphizing and engendering everything from single-celled organisms to battleships ("she's a beauty")... both living and nonliving objects are often anthropomorphized, and have been, throughout history.

It is entirely more provable that we have the habit of describing everything else including our idea of god (remember that no one has actually shown empirical evidence of god's alleged humanoid, male form... ever) in relation to ourselves, rather than assuming god has created us in his image.

Personally, I would like to see posts on various beliefs. I fear the way this thing has gone, however, presents a less than hospitable atmosphere for those who might otherwise like to express their religious views. I feel that I would be enriched by it, and do invite people to please start doing so.

A lot of that has to do with the people who start these threads and the underlying motivations which they were created to serve. However, from there on, it's up to us to determine how this thread gets used. I'm talking about my beliefs... I'm not talking about what you should believe. Just because I'd tell Jesus to go fly a kite if he told me to jump in the lake doesn't mean I think you should. My beliefs may not be for you... I never assumed that they were.

 

How would some of you define religion? i see many anti-theist points of view, and maybe i have made the mistake of converting this as a christian sanctuary thread, but if it is an anti-christian or a thread made to argue among religions, then what would be the point?

Personally i am curious about other's beliefs and the reasons why they subscribe to them, but if we are going to get into the debate about someone being dilusional in their beliefs, then let's just stop here.

Let's share our personal beliefs and the reasons why we do/don't subscribe to them, but let's not get into an ANTI-theist argument.

 

Ok, I'll bite...

I believe that everything is one. I believe that all things are interconnected, whether "living" or "nonliving". I believe that the idea of god is nebulous at best, and to me "god" only means that which encompasses everything.

I have a philosophy, not a religion... A religion becomes too prescriptive in nature when it tells us to do things we wouldn't necessarily normally do, were we not concerned about belonging... at least that has been my observation.

I guess if you would normally, without prescription, do the things that a religion tells to you do... then my view is that you are an individual who can manage your own affairs without being given direction.

This is why, despite whatever my personal beliefs may be, I find it impossible to declare that everyone must have a path set for them or that I know which path they must take... especially if I have no idea where they've been, where they're coming from, and where they're trying to go.

When people understood extremely little of the world around them, religion was born as a means of directing action without analytical thinking.

In my job, I can't function solely on instinct, I can't relinquish my senses and blindly devote myself to one mode of thinking, either... I have to think analytically, otherwise I'll never solve the myriad problems thrown my way and I'll get fired. Same with life... except for the getting fired part... of course I could be stubborn to the point where my inflexibility gets me killed.

I've managed to avoid death many times... not because of some unexplainable miracle... but because of my refusal to accept the impossible. I've lived a very good life for someone who's been thrown a lot of curves... and I don't chalk it up to an invisible man... I chalk it up to the fact that I believe I can accomplish anything upon which I firmly set my thoughts and actions.

"Do or do not. There is no try."
- Master Yoda

 

The funny thing is that to me whatever my "religion" has stated that i should do, i have never done.

From my point of view, experience, and growth there should be no such thing as a religion. I don't consider myself religious, i have a relationship with God directly, no based on what someone teaches me. I read the Bible and consider it God's word, but i can read the same thing many times and each time i learn something new and different. That is what we "Christians" call divine revelation. That stated, i and many other christians do not follow a layed path, unless you consider that the Bible is not God inspired, we follow the Bible and that is our source for guidance.

In my case i have never had any problems with following what is described in the Bible, i do have struggles, just like anyone else in this world, but as far as being denied things or having a list of Do's and Dont's, it is not my reality. Even the Bible states that we are allowed everything but not everything edifies (paraphrasing and translating from my Spanish Bible). So as far as being led by a blind man, i think that is a misconception.

I hope i portrayed my belief clearly.

 

So as far as being led by a blind man..

Is this addressed to me? I never said anything about a blind man... just an invisible one.

 

No, i was talking about myself, and many people's view of what christianity is, a blind faith. I was stating that i was not being led by a blind man.

 

PENA: Mixing metaphors, methinks. Being "led by a blind man" and being blindly devoted are entirely two different things.

In the case of fundamentalist Christianity, which makes the assumption that the Bible is literal truth... the latter metaphor applies... "blind devotion" is more commonly used to refer to fundamentalist Christianity.

I personally haven't heard the former metaphor, "being led by a blind man", used often, if at all, to describe Christianity. Certainly not by me.

Of course that's beside the point... since I don't believe seeing is necessarily believing... or that believing is seeing, for that matter. That being said, even if Christianity isn't a blind man... what he sees, IMO, may not necessarily be the truth... but one interpretation of it, amongst many.

 

Greetings...
Finally, I detect intellect. I also believe that a thread like this should be a place
where people can share their beliefs and learn from them. I have spent a great deal of my time learning about other people's religions and spirituality and it has helped me on my own quest.

I beleive that in the beginning, man created God in his own image.
I do not feel that God is a sentient being but is the universal force of energy that cannot be created or destroyed, only transformed from one form to another. "The Force" is in all matter from the quantum level to the largest of galaxies.

Humans have always personified those things that they could not understand. Gave human characteristics and developed stories and folklore for easier understanding.

Religion today is evolving. I do not consider myself religious but my spirituality is very deep and very broad.

Most feel that one's destiny lies at the end of their journey, yet in the end it is the journey that mattered. Live the journey because every destinantion is a door way to another.

Just wanted to share.

 

Heck, christianity isn't even a religion anymore. It's a "relationship". I don't see anything religious when it comes to the force or tao or anything like that. I like to think something special is going on out there, but i think it's elusive at best. Also, if something special is going on out there, there's nothing "miraculous" about it. Unless being refreshed after drinking a glass of water is miraculous.

 

Hopefully, tomorrow I'll be able to devote some time to addressing many of the comments.
For now, only this, as I've got to be up early.


Cydonia,
Allow me to apologize in advance if I have misconstrued your comment.


To put things in perspective for you, I hope:

The word "religion" is used in the Scriptures 5, count'em, 5 times.

The word "religious" twice.

All 7 references were in the NT, in only 3 books.

Acts 13:43
Acts 26:5
Gal. 1:13
Gal. 1:14
Jas. 1:26
Jas. 1:26(not a duplicate.)
Jas. 1:27

In 4 of these references it is St. Paul speaking, using the word as an implied negative in connotation and example.

Let me quote the other 3 uses in James,

"If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his own tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's religion is in vain."

"Pure religion and undefiled before God is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world."





It should be interesting to note the conspicious lack of emphasis on, and reference to, "religion" in the Holy Scriptures, eh?


Perhaps, it is your understanding of the Lord that is to be held suspect, not the concept that Christianity is about having a "personal relationship" with Jesus Christ?

The Pharisee's were religious, and the very ones 'allegedly' awaiting the coming of Messiah, yet no one was condemned by Christ more harshly than they. the Pharisees were also the event coordinators for the Crucifixion of Christ. That is, they are the ones who demanded his execution, because He objected to their "religiousness". That was part of the reason, to understate.

How do you think God regards "religions"?

There's a distinction here that I hope isn't failed on you.

Could it be the people here are telling you truly, but your own misconceptions are getting in the way?

The Lord has a problem with "religion" for religions sake as well. He is the first to condemn it's use as a tool for subjagating and controlling people tyrannically.

 

...in your opinion.

Anyway, i meant more of the way the word is used today.

 

Brooks-
Stop calling god a he.









and stop pressing enter so many times after each sentence.

 

I'm curious....

Why do Christians rely so much on the Bible
to justify their religion? The Bible was written thousands of years ago and translated through many languages.

I can remember playing "whisper down the lane" in elementary school and in 3 minutes, by 20 students, one sentence has been completely
altered.

I have often wondered what variables such as thousands of years, millions of people and several languages could do to the validity of the writings of the Bible.

I have always felt that the Bible should be read as a history book...nothing more, nothing less.

I do not want to offend anyone reading this,
I just hope that I can help open the minds of some.

 

Qui-Rune,

No variation in thousands of years.

That is one aspect of the significance of the Dead Sea Scrolls; it shows that the some of the oldest books contained in the Bible have been reliably kept, just as tradition has said all along.



Keep in mind that the authorship of the Scriptures was divinely inspired, meaning the God that is above and outside of time, and is in fact the Creator of space, time, and matter, wouldn't ever be out-of-date.

Gen. 1:1
In the beginning(TIME)God created the heaven(SPACE) and the earth(MATTER).

Isaiah 46:9-10
"Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,

"Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, MY counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:"

God is not subject to time, no, time is subject to God.

 

Sleazo,

God(not "goddess")is a "He", according to Scriptural reference and history.

Jesus Christ was God incarnate, and was definitely not a she.


Should



I


nolonger



refer



to




you



as



a



"he"?

 

Darth,

You do not know if their has never been variations in the biblical translations.

As for the Dead Sea Scrolls, many were kept
hidden by the Catholics until the early 1980's. Their are writings that differ from events depicted in the Bible and writings that offer different parallels. For example, it is written by one of the Essene prophets that Jesus lived to be an old man and had children.

Is it true? We will never know. That's why I say that the Bible should be viewed as a history book...nothing more, nothing less. Even if you read history books from the last century, the stories differ depending on the individual's perspective.

So why do Christian's place so much weight on the Bible? 75% of what you wrote in your last message was Biblical quotes. Whenever I have discussions with Christians, it seems all they do is quote the Bible.

Take the Bible away and what do you have?

 

Cydonia,

This really boils down to trying to describe a fish to someone who's never even seen water.

Christ is a matter for the heart.

If there is no relationship, then Christianity has no hope of fulfilling it's promises.

All the cold stats and facts have no hope of fulfilling the most basic, primordial need of the heart. That need is love. A deeply longed for, and often misidentified need.

There's a void within, one that yearningly calls out for a beloved, that we increasingly try to fill by scheduling our lives with distractions to satisfy.


All I wanted was the "truth", objective, truth by the very definition of the word. And by the definition of the word truth is exclusivistic.

The last place I thought it would be found was in the claims of Christianity.

But, here I am.

I also know the illusive "meaning of life"( which Monty Python didn't locate); to love.
That's it. That simple. That's what's at the core of it all. That's why the universe was created, and human beings, and the planets and stars and everything.


THE GOOD NEWS

You can know God is real, and Christ, and the Holy Spirit. That's what we're trying to tell you.

But, how could you possibly "know" for certain unless you encountered the Lord?

That's where the personal relationship comes in, because you can't unless Christ manifests Himself to you, personally.


Now, you've been told the point-blank truth. Accept it or reject it, your life.

I offer a friendly warning to you, that as you reject this you will ultimately miss out on the best life has to offer.
You'll miss meeting God in this life.
That would be poignantly a shame.

Maybe one day you'll come to the end of yourself, tired of who you are, and look up at the stars...or maybe not.

Maybe, you'll end up violently as Voltaire and Stalin on their death beds. Two of histories more famous atheists/antitheists, both screaming and cursing horribly. Both comfortlessly terrified, as was Hitler, by the terrible, fierce, and mocking dark creatures hideously taunting them in their dying moments.

A scare tactic? Only if it's not true.

But I've also seen these things.

Have you ever been with someone when they died? I have. A couple of times.

I've also seen a man on his death bed, who like Stalin and Voltaire, saw these horrible entities come at the last. No, I don't believe it was an hallucination. Like I just said, I've seen them while in the best of health. And so have close friends of mine in the ministry.

The French philosophe Voltaire upon his deathbed cursed atheism and his atheist 'friends' in his last breaths, his vaunted ascerbic wit spent, and the cause of his celebrity his torment.

Stalin in his last breath, according to his daughter, Svetlana(sp.?), said he raised his fist and shook it at God with the last vestige of his physical strength. In case you missed the tragic ironic significance, though in vitriole and venom, he acknowledged God in the end.

I'm not trying to frighten you. I promise.
Just put the facts out there on the table.

Atheism fails.

 

Qui-Rune,

I do know. I've looked into the matter over quite some time.

The Scrolls weren't "hidden." But they weren't available to the general public, however, certain scholastics were given access, much in the same vein as the Shroud of Turin. These are invaluable artifacts, and until the 1980s the investigativw research, and translation of the scrolls was ongoing; a work in progress. Therefore, there was no public disclosure until that was completed.

You're also refering to certain gnostic and apocryphal texts as kept by the Essenes.

It's not at all as complicated as you may think. It only appears that way superficially to the neophyte.

I've tried to avoid this subject, only because it is getting into some dry history. There's not any real controversy surrounding this, beyond what is tantamount to modern urban folklore.

There's nothing suspicious, hidden, or secret, despite what spin-meisters of the sensationalistic tried to insinuate in seeking controversy.


If, you really want, I guess we could begin to dig into the historicity of the Holy Bible, if it will help dispel some erroneous notions that have become so common.

 

ps-Most of this falls into what I relegatorily call by the epithet, secular mythology. As long as hearsay and conjectural 'hypothesis' is foregone for the hard facts, there is no mystery. Indeed, it only confirms the strength of Holy Scripture across the centuries.

 

Most think an atheist is someone who does not believe in God. If they said this, they would still be justifying the existence of God by not believing he exists.

An atheist is someone who believes that the possibility of the existence of an almighty God does not exist.

Does that make sense?

Now, for me... I believe in the possibility
of a higher intelligence. So much that I believe that life is abundant in the universe. Yet the universe is so vast that most cannot comprehend this abundance.

My sprituality does not end on Earth nor in the clouds above.

I, too understand the illusive meaning of life; to love. Also, to feel love.
It is here that we meet on common ground.

My perception of "God" is different than yours.

As I have said before, most believe that one's destiny lies at the end of their journey...but in the end it is the journey that mattered. Live the jouney...for every destination is but a doorway to another.

PS: I love that quote

 

Maybe one day you'll come to the end of yourself, tired of who you are, and look up at the stars...or maybe not.

m'kay. This reminds me of a post i posted in the non thread, about how i looked up at the stars one nite and was overwhelmed by how trivial and shortsighted the whole bible deal really is. I guess people just draw different conclusions from the same data.

 

Cydonia,

Each to their own.

"Everyman has a way that seems right unto thmeselves but the end thereof I destruction."

I don't think we can trust our own conclusions--basically it would have all the authority of wishful thinking.

I see the stars and recognize insignificance.
In fact, I had exactly that experience before reading the words of the psalmist: "What is man that thou art mindful of him, O'Lord?"

Of course that was before I was familiar with the Bible, but it was literally minutes before I was to have the life changing encounter with the Lord.

You've touched on something you may want to ponder; the problem with god is that He's not audacious enough for most people. He's too humble. Most people aren't actually humble.

 

Qui-Rune



"Everyman has a way that seems right unto thmeselves but the end thereof is destruction."




Are you mature enough to stand the hard-ground?

As children we have pablum, milk, but we have to grow into solids.

We all come up with a lot of ideas that sound sweet and quaint to ourselves; but then we hit a speed bump and have to ask if we are authentic, or we blind ourselves because we really don't desire the answers.

Poetry pleases the ears, but it only has a place, and life isn't a totality of poetry or our minds have become escapist, turning away from realities that have caged us, so that we can at least pretend soothingly that we are free.


Has religion evolved? Should it?

Indeed not. It couldn't have been authentic if 'evolution' was necessary. God being transcendent, we haven't caught up with Him, not the other way around. God isn't trying to play catch up with us, or by definition, it isn't God.

Growth, certainly, but not the truth, only our character towards the truth and into conformity with truth. Absolute truth doesn't change. It IS. (I am that I am.)

For there to be a God, and there is, it is only our misconceptions, borne in selfisheness, that would regard Him as being in need of growth, or his truth in need of "evolution." That is pure conceit and vanity, to presume that because of our short-sightedness, that a transcendent God is short-sighted. Thus, we ascribe and transpose our limited maturity and faultiness onto that which is already waiting at the end of the road upon us.



Solomon asked, rhetorically, if there was anything new under the sun?

Not religiously, there isn't.

Even new-age concepts are merely a rehashing of ancient pagan notions, repackaged and re-presented to a new audience.



The only way to know the truth is to be provided the information by someone omniscient and omnipresent, which are precisely attributes of God.

But the stumbling blocks barring the way generally fall into the category of the presumptious arrogance of man. This can be the patent dismissal of concepts of deity, or an imaginative construct of deity that pleases ourselves( the aforementioned 'immaturity/selfishness.')

The next hurdle, or a simultaneous one, is what will you do with the truth if you receive it? And, how bad do you want it? Motivations.

God resists the proud. Pride is a state of delusions, of self-preeminence built upon egocentric self-deception. Are we so attached to that, so comfortable with it, that we won't allow the truth access?

We have to understand that God will not conform to our own ideological vision if it is outside of His expression of deity. That would make God a liar, and is definitely linked thematically, and really, to the account of the fall of man in the Garden.

On a more basic level, to avoid any philosophical hogwash, try to tell your employer that you've decided to restructure of your own volition the entire corporation, starting with making yourself the new CEO. When he says you've lost your mind, then try to tell him that he isn't a good boss for not conforming to your ideas of how things should run. Quite simply, that isn't rational or reality.

Yet, that's exactly the absurd position of so many that have a problem with Christianity, Christ, and God.

Such thought processes are symptomatic of mental illness in any other discussion, or area of life. That's aptly a working definition of 'neurosis.'

The problem is not with religion, but in the self-justification systems within the individual human minds.


What part of the 10 Commandments would you say need evolution?

Not to steal?
Not to murder?
Not to lie?
Not to commmit adultery?
etc.

Christ said the whole of the commandments were interconnected, that one couldn't be broken without breaking them all; and that the entirety of the commandments was in Loving God and everyone else as ourselves.

You don't break a commandment because of your love for others. If you love someone, for example, you don't steal from them.


What needs to "evo

 

Of course, this all presupposes that Christianity is both the one true religion and the default religion; the latter has never been true, and the former is highly subjective. In essence, it boils down to "Christianity is true because Christianity is true."

The argument that (to summarize) "Truth is truth, regardless of how you see it" can easily be applied to any religion, or any belief at all. I've known Wiccans, for example, who maintain that magic can only be experienced by those who believe in it; those who don't are headblind, or oblivious to its effects. Certain African tribes use masks to channel spirits, and the participants' reactions are often ecstatic when the spirits obstensibly arrive. Many Christians believe that Jesus' conduit to the world is faith; the stronger you believe, the more he'll be in your life.

Whether one prays to Yahweh, Odin, or a deity of one's own invention, faith is a matter of personal choice. The question of who's right and wrong, if indeed such a question need be asked, does not fall to humans; no one here has ever seen God, and thus no one is remotely qualified to claim superior knowledge of Him.