Could it be this simple?

[Tre-L]

Everything I once believed about Christianity has come to a head, and has been challenged to such a degree that I have come to believe that the Christian religion is false (Along with all others), but also that the message of Christ is true.

I look back at the old testament all the way to the new, and have come to the point where I feel I must ditch the religious baggage of it all in favor of simple submission to God, who I believe to be love. Btw, this is a very real change of heart, and deprogramming myself from a lifetime of indoctrination was a painful experience.

I'm thinking about what Jesus said about pouring new wine into old wine skins. It would seem that in order for mankind to be made new, we must empty ourselves completely of our past indoctrination, starting with a clean (New) slate, and then fill ourselves only with God's Spirit, which is love (The new wine).

The old wine (Religion) might "seem" better to some, but I think Jesus pretty much told us to ditch it all, and start with a clean slate, and a new heart so we might be filled with Gods Spirit, which is truth. Everything else weighs us down, and ultimately leads to our (Mankind's) destruction.

Think about the way many Christians and many who follow other religions are intolerant of others and extremely hateful towards them (Atheists, homosexuals, and those who practice different religions than their own, etc). These type of Christians and religious zealots are those who will be destroyed by the "new wine" simply because their ways are not in agreement with the "Spirit", nor are their ways conducive to love and peace.

Could it be that one day their own beliefs will be challenged, and they will either continue on the broken road, remaining intolerant of those they share the world with, or they will submit to God in all they do, and accept others for who they are? I suppose time will tell.

I'm one who believes that God answers those who call on Him, but also that we must be willing to hear Him, and then allow ourselves to submit to Him and live through His Spirit (Love) completely. Otherwise we are apt to lead destructive lives and many people will suffer because of. Love is surely the answer, and it is submission to love (God) that Christ taught mankind. The rest is man attempting to rule over man, which seems to cause a great deal of conflict.

So .... What are we fighting each other for? It seems to me that we should accept others where they are in life, and love one another no matter what others believe about God. I think the atheists and agnostics are better geared to accept love than are those who have been indoctrinated by years of religious muck, which ultimately leads to the intolerance of those we share this world with.

Belief in God isn't necessary to esteem and value love after all, nor is it necessary to live our lives with love for all people. Could it be this simple? Could love be the way that will lead mankind to life, and religion the way that will lead mankind to destruction? I can't help but think of all the violent conflicts fought in the name of ones religion, and likewise I can't think of one violent conflict fought in the name of love.

Religion vs. Love (Could it "really" be this simple?) :yes:

Tre-L

 

[enchanted_one1975]

Well said. Welcome to the forums. I am a former Christian too. When I stood back and looked at everything it just didn't make sense to me anymore. It is a realization that people need to make for themselves though. Faith is one of those things that, when pulled at, one will just hold on that much tighter. I think you will get along fine here at Religious Forums.

 

[Thief]

Good post.

I'm not religious per se.
But the Carpenter remains my inspiration.
I focus on the parables.

I strongly suspect that knowing them is very much like having a hook
caught in your ear.
You might be able to get the hook loose, but it will leave a mark.

You can't say later.....you didn't hear such things.

Otherwise I have little interest in religious dogma.

Welcome to the forum....good luck.

 

[Tre-L]

Well said. Welcome to the forums. I am a former Christian too. When I stood back and looked at everything it just didn't make sense to me anymore. It is a realization that people need to make for themselves though. Faith is one of those things that, when pulled at, one will just hold on that much tighter. I think you will get along fine here at Religious Forums.

Thanks, enchanted_one ....

It can be a difficult thing to question and then challenge all you have ever believed to be true. Some become extremely bitter afterwords, while others seem to get along just fine. I for one still read the scriptures, I simply no longer place my entire faith in the idea that they are an absolute authority on life.

In defense of the scriptures (At least the NT) they are what introduced me to the man called Jesus, and for that I am grateful. Jesus was quite the fellow, and it is because of His recorded life that I came to value and esteem love above all else.

Jesus had some very harsh words to say to the religious leaders of His day, but only because they were so hard and blind to the simplicity of Jesus' message, and the truth He represented. I am one who believes His message was to simply to Let Love Rule in our lives. This was (In a nutshell) the crux of His entire ministry as far as I can tell.

Tre-L

 

[Tre-L]

Good post.

I'm not religious per se.
But the Carpenter remains my inspiration.
I focus on the parables.

I strongly suspect that knowing them is very much like having a hook
caught in your ear.
You might be able to get the hook loose, but it will leave a mark.

You can't say later.....you didn't hear such things.

Otherwise I have little interest in religious dogma.

Welcome to the forum....good luck.

I'm much like you, Thief. Jesus remains my inspiration. Jesus not only epitomized the goodness of God, but the fullness of God was said to dwell in Him, and in such a measure that few can truly fathom His (Divine?) nature, which is without doubt an example and inspiration to those of us whom desire to walk in His footsteps, giving us hope and strengthening our own resolve. Jesus was said to be like us in every way. He overcame His own temptations and lived through love (Gods Spirit?), which He never allowed himself to stray from. Such is our own calling, imo. "What one man can do, another can do."

Is it not reasonable to believe that God (Assuming God exists) would much rather us love one another than to fight tooth and nail to preserve our primitive religious ideologies, which we often attempt to force on others? Christians seem to want a Christian world, Muslims a Muslim world, etc. Why can't we just unite under a common thread present in most religions? Why can't we unite under love, which is surely present in the pulse of every living being?

All the religious baggage hinders us as a peoples. It weighs us down, whereby we [Mankind) are unable to live our lives free from religious rule and regulation, and from the oppression that stems from them . Laws were given, but those laws are not the means by which we are able to truly live. Religions place restrictions on man, and I for one believe our only true restriction is living in opposition to love. Rejecting love is dangerous simply because we cannot know life without it.

All mankind truly needs to do is love one another, but most are unable to see the forest for those darned trees, which is to say that many can't see the simplicity of the truth (In love) because of all the so called religious requirements standing in the way. Do we really need all that extra baggage to live and maintain a good life? We (Mankind) can live on bare necessity and still thrive more so than with all the baggage that comes from our religious rules, practices, doctrines, etc.

I think we are free to live so long as we live to love, the rest just weighs mankind down. Christianity was never meant to be a religion anyway, but rather a way of life as demonstrated by the man named Jesus.

That's where I stand Thief, and thanks for the welcome!

Tre-L

 

[jmvizanko]

Its interesting that you had the sense to ditch the nasty parts of Christianity, yet still hold Jesus on the highest pillar. IMO there are substantially better moral thinkers and teachers out there. Plus Jesus said some downright crazy things amidst all the preaching of love.

 

[idea]

I can't think of one violent conflict fought in the name of love.

I can...

Some believe that the opposite of love is not hate, but indifference - that in order to hate someone, you first have to care what they think/do...

 

[Tre-L]

Its interesting that you had the sense to ditch the nasty parts of Christianity, yet still hold Jesus on the highest pillar. IMO there are substantially better moral thinkers and teachers out there. Plus Jesus said some downright crazy things amidst all the preaching of love.

Jesus was my inspiration after all, so it is only reasonable that I hold His life in high regard, no? Sure, there are other moral thinkers and teachers (Past and present), most of whom I hold a great respect for, but Jesus was my introduction to love. It isn't just His words that made the impact on me but also His life, and His willingness to die without lifting a finger against His enemies.

Tre-L

 

[Tre-L]

I can...

Some believe that the opposite of love is not hate, but indifference - that in order to hate someone, you first have to care what they think/do...

I'm one who believes the same. Indifference is the opposite of love. Hate is quite a different beast. Perhaps it rests somewhere in the middle of the pole?

Tre-L

 

[Levite]

I have come to believe that the Christian religion is false (Along with all others), but also that the message of Christ is true.

So, you've decided that you don't enjoy Christianity anymore. Well and good. Whatever motivates you, spiritually. But in deciding to reject your religion, you've come to the conclusion that all other religions are false (whatever the hell "false" means in that context)? You don't find that level of judgment at all presumptuous?

I presume that you must be quite learned in Christian scholarship (Bible interpretation, theology, philosophy, ritual praxis, social theory, etc.) to consider all the potential of all the various Christian sects and denominations to be nugatory. But I confess I am skeptical about the others. Have you studied and truly understood all the other religions? Or even just Judaism and Islam, the other two major Western religions? Have you become truly familiar with all the range of different theological, philosophical, ritual practical, philosophical, and cultural views, opinions, and tenets of those religions (for which study I assume you have learned Hebrew and Arabic, at least)?

Otherwise, it seems, perhaps, a tad arrogant to just write them all off blindly, if you don't even understand them fully.

What about other religions? Zoroastrianism? Hinduism? Buddhism? Jainism? Taoism? Sikhism? Baha'i? Shinto? All the indigenous religions from all over the world? Revived or created syncretic religions like the various Pagan and Wiccan paths?

You've studied and immersed yourself in all of those different faiths, paths, traditions, and cultures (and languages) to the extent that you feel qualified to come out in public and say that each and every one of them is barren of any truth, if not actually unproductive? Really?

Belief in God isn't necessary to esteem and value love after all, nor is it necessary to live our lives with love for all people. Could it be this simple? Could love be the way that will lead mankind to life, and religion the way that will lead mankind to destruction? I can't help but think of all the violent conflicts fought in the name of ones religion, and likewise I can't think of one violent conflict fought in the name of love. Religion vs. Love (Could it "really" be this simple?)

No, it couldn't be. That sounds pretty as all get-out to say, but it is so vague and diffuse that can mean anything or nothing. Religion is more than just grooving on connectedness and love. It's about culture, society, human relations not just in a vaguely overarching metaphysical sense but in a pragmatic daily sense, about traditions and shared values, art, literature, poetry, music, a hundred kinds of shared culture, philosophy, liturgy, ritual, and different kinds of theology.

Of course religion can be abused, used for violence and oppression. So can any kind of social or philosophical principle. Even love. During the Crusades and the attendant pogroms through the middle ages, Christians often forcibly converted Jews and Muslims, and their stated reason was that they loved the Jews and Muslims so much that they refused to stand by while the Jews and Muslims condemned themselves to Hell. You ask most Christians today, they'll say that was a horrible abuse of Christianity, not what their religion is supposed to be at all. But it happened, and it wasn't merely "religion" gone wrong, it was a perversion of the concept of love and God as Love. Anything can be twisted, if one is not careful.

The world is complex. God is complex. People are complex. Looking to simplistic philosophical statements that can be encapsulated in a bumper sticker blurb is really not the answer to resolving the issues in religions, or the problems of the world in general.

 

[cynic2005]

Everything I once believed about Christianity has come to a head, and has been challenged to such a degree that I have come to believe that the Christian religion is false (Along with all others), but also that the message of Christ is true.
Tre-L

When I stopped being a Christian, I still held onto the teachings of Jesus. Really, I think they are excellent moral teachings--full of reason. The rest of the bible to me is full of contradiction, people's interpretations rather than any sort of divine revelation.

 

[Tre-L]

So, you've decided that you don't enjoy Christianity anymore. Well and good. Whatever motivates you, spiritually. But in deciding to reject your religion, you've come to the conclusion that all other religions are false (whatever the hell "false" means in that context)? You don't find that level of judgment at all presumptuous?

I presume that you must be quite learned in Christian scholarship (Bible interpretation, theology, philosophy, ritual praxis, social theory, etc.) to consider all the potential of all the various Christian sects and denominations to be nugatory. But I confess I am skeptical about the others. Have you studied and truly understood all the other religions? Or even just Judaism and Islam, the other two major Western religions? Have you become truly familiar with all the range of different theological, philosophical, ritual practical, philosophical, and cultural views, opinions, and tenets of those religions (for which study I assume you have learned Hebrew and Arabic, at least)?

Otherwise, it seems, perhaps, a tad arrogant to just write them all off blindly, if you don't even understand them fully.

What about other religions? Zoroastrianism? Hinduism? Buddhism? Jainism? Taoism? Sikhism? Baha'i? Shinto? All the indigenous religions from all over the world? Revived or created syncretic religions like the various Pagan and Wiccan paths?

You've studied and immersed yourself in all of those different faiths, paths, traditions, and cultures (and languages) to the extent that you feel qualified to come out in public and say that each and every one of them is barren of any truth, if not actually unproductive? Really?



No, it couldn't be. That sounds pretty as all get-out to say, but it is so vague and diffuse that can mean anything or nothing. Religion is more than just grooving on connectedness and love. It's about culture, society, human relations not just in a vaguely overarching metaphysical sense but in a pragmatic daily sense, about traditions and shared values, art, literature, poetry, music, a hundred kinds of shared culture, philosophy, liturgy, ritual, and different kinds of theology.

Of course religion can be abused, used for violence and oppression. So can any kind of social or philosophical principle. Even love. During the Crusades and the attendant pogroms through the middle ages, Christians often forcibly converted Jews and Muslims, and their stated reason was that they loved the Jews and Muslims so much that they refused to stand by while the Jews and Muslims condemned themselves to Hell. You ask most Christians today, they'll say that was a horrible abuse of Christianity, not what their religion is supposed to be at all. But it happened, and it wasn't merely "religion" gone wrong, it was a perversion of the concept of love and God as Love. Anything can be twisted, if one is not careful.

The world is complex. God is complex. People are complex. Looking to simplistic philosophical statements that can be encapsulated in a bumper sticker blurb is really not the answer to resolving the issues in religions, or the problems of the world in general.

I never suggested that all religions were void of any truth, but that all are false in that there are falsehoods in every one. Surely you wouldn't deny this to be a reality. I can confidently say that all religions are false, just as I can confidently say that all offer mankind certain truths.

The point is that many religions place numerous and needless restrictions on those who practice them. Religion (Like our governments) is simply mans attempt to rule other men when only God can rule successfully (Assuming God exists). Religious traditions or no more dangerous than drinking a glass of wine at dinner, but the fundamentalists, certain ideologies, and certain mindsets (Such as I'm right and you are wrong) can lead man down a very slippery slope.

I'm content with the idea that religion can be both dangerous and useful, but also that man has a tendency to abuse what they believe to be true. Even love (As you say) can be abused when a person feels their way is right, and that there is no other way but theirs. Religion itself is only a tool to help mankind discover truth. It is just sad that many take their religions to a very dark place.

Tre-L

 

[Poisonshady313]

Its interesting that you had the sense to ditch the nasty parts of Christianity, yet still hold Jesus on the highest pillar. IMO there are substantially better moral thinkers and teachers out there. Plus Jesus said some downright crazy things amidst all the preaching of love.

This post reminds me of some words from Christian apologist CS Lewis:

"I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."



This is an interesting statement. It casts all of Jesus' words in a whole new light. Regardless of which you chose... whether Jesus was God or the Devil.... it doesn't come out very well either way... because if you suggest that Jesus was God, you're in a position (if you buy Lewis' sentiment) of saying that God is not a great moral teacher, that His words are either loony or evil.

Now, to a person who believes this about God already (i.e. anyone who already finds God to be cruel for any reason, be it plagues, allowing evil to exist, damning people to hell), this option doesn't seem so bizarre. But for a person who believes that God is good to believe that Jesus is any way a representation or manifestation of God... or perhaps simply is God Himself.... seems to be a contradiction.

 

[Tre-L]

This post reminds me of some words from Christian apologist CS Lewis:

"I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."



This is an interesting statement. It casts all of Jesus' words in a whole new light. Regardless of which you chose... whether Jesus was God or the Devil.... it doesn't come out very well either way... because if you suggest that Jesus was God, you're in a position (if you buy Lewis' sentiment) of saying that God is not a great moral teacher, that His words are either loony or evil.

Now, to a person who believes this about God already (i.e. anyone who already finds God to be cruel for any reason, be it plagues, allowing evil to exist, damning people to hell), this option doesn't seem so bizarre. But for a person who believes that God is good to believe that Jesus is any way a representation or manifestation of God... or perhaps simply is God Himself.... seems to be a contradiction.

I think this is in part due to the literalists mindset. Did Jesus really mean that we should literally pluck out our eyes, or that we should literally hate our family, etc. I suppose it falls on how we interpret his words, and where we take them.

 

[jmvizanko]

Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse.

These words in particular seem very contradictory to me. Basically Lewis is saying that it makes sense for the lunacy that Jesus said to be true, if he is god, but its completely insane if he isn't god. Does this mean god is insane?

Nice avatar btw.

 

[Poisonshady313]

I think this is in part due to the literalists mindset.

I don't think this is the case.

 

[Poisonshady313]

These words in particular seem very contradictory to me. Basically Lewis is saying that it makes sense for the lunacy that Jesus said to be true, if he is god, but its completely insane if he isn't god. Does this mean god is insane?

That's exactly what I was talking about when I said this:

Regardless of which you chose... whether Jesus was God or the Devil.... it doesn't come out very well either way.

Nice avatar btw.

Thank you.

 

[Tre-L]

These words in particular seem very contradictory to me. Basically Lewis is saying that it makes sense for the lunacy that Jesus said to be true, if he is god, but its completely insane if he isn't god. Does this mean god is insane?

Nice avatar btw.

I believe that Jesus was the son of God, just as I believe that there are many others who could be called sons of God, and also daughters of God. I have never believed that Jesus was God himself, however. Nor do I think He ever intended us to believe such.

 

[Tre-L]

I don't think this is the case.

Could you expand on this a bit?

 

[Tre-L]

When I stopped being a Christian, I still held onto the teachings of Jesus. Really, I think they are excellent moral teachings--full of reason. The rest of the bible to me is full of contradiction, people's interpretations rather than any sort of divine revelation.

I agree that His teachings are both moral and excellent (Full of reason). Also that the rest of scripture, particularly the OT is full of contradiction.