psychoslice
Veteran Member
And how do you know that ??.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is one religion better than the other.. and if so....
- Thread starter Segev Moran
- Start date
psychoslice,
It seems to me that there must be one religion that is better than all others, because the Bible speaks of, The Way, which means one Way, meaning all other ways are wrong ways, Acts 9:2, 24:14,22. The Bible, at Ephesians 4:3-6, says that there is one Faith, which seems to me to be saying that only one faith is acceptable to God.
Jesus, when on earth said that God's word is truth, John 17:17. If all followed God's words would that not be of one faith?? At 1Corinthians 1:10 says that Christians should speak the same, that there should be no divisions among God's people. Do these instructions allow for more than one faith??? If you teach different doctrines, would that not cause divisions among God's congregation? Could the teaching of wrong doctrines be the reason for so many divisions in, what is called Christianity?? If different churches teach different doctrines, with some being in contradiction with other doctrines, can all be of that one faith, the Bible speaks of??? Is there one faith that teaches the same doctrines all over the world?? If there is we had better find it fast, because, according to Bible prophecy, Jesus is coming very soon!!!
It seems to me that there must be one religion that is better than all others, because the Bible speaks of, The Way, which means one Way, meaning all other ways are wrong ways, Acts 9:2, 24:14,22. The Bible, at Ephesians 4:3-6, says that there is one Faith, which seems to me to be saying that only one faith is acceptable to God.
Jesus, when on earth said that God's word is truth, John 17:17. If all followed God's words would that not be of one faith?? At 1Corinthians 1:10 says that Christians should speak the same, that there should be no divisions among God's people. Do these instructions allow for more than one faith??? If you teach different doctrines, would that not cause divisions among God's congregation? Could the teaching of wrong doctrines be the reason for so many divisions in, what is called Christianity?? If different churches teach different doctrines, with some being in contradiction with other doctrines, can all be of that one faith, the Bible speaks of??? Is there one faith that teaches the same doctrines all over the world?? If there is we had better find it fast, because, according to Bible prophecy, Jesus is coming very soon!!!
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
But that's because you bought into the Bible as being the scriptures you follow, whereas billions of other people have bought into the Qur'an, the Vedas, the Pali Canon, etc.
Personally, I believe all religions are serious and largely honest attempts to try and understand God(s), so I really don't get into which one is supposedly better than the rest because there's simply no way of telling. If the Bible speaks to you, that's fine, but I think it's also fine if others use other sources or even just go by meditation.
Kelly of the Phoenix
Well-Known Member
Well, until you start digging for Truth within Christianity. Then it gets complicated.
Jesus is all about us judging the tree by its fruit, but seems to be insulted if we do the same to HIM.
Since the history of our country began and even earlier, soldiers have always gotten the shaft when it comes to getting paid. Many are on food stamps and if they ARE paid, some are even told to give their pay BACK.
How many rich public servants do you know?
I'm saying the definition of immortality is meaning: death proof. Can't die.
Adam was never offered immortality. Adam could loose out on everlasting life and could die.
Adam could have everlasting life only as long as he did Not break God's Law.
If Adam was immortal ( death proof ) then Adam would Not be able to loose out on eternal life.
Adam broke God's Law which carried with it the death penalty ( capital punishment ) - Genesis 2:17
Thus, 'mortal Adam' died because he broke God's Law.
Adam made himself into a self-made sinner and sinners die - Ezekiel 18:4,20
For the 'mortal' ( Adam and us ) 'Absence of death' is connected to Not breaking God's Law.
Do you know anyone who has Not died, if Not, then everyone we know of is: mortal.
Only the immortal can Not die. Adam was Not created as immortal, but mortal.
The only way the dead can regain life is via resurrection.
Like Adam, we can Not resurrect oneself or anyone else, so we need someone who can resurrect us.
According to Scripture, Jesus can and will - Revelation 1:18; Acts of the Apostles 24:15
What do you find wrong with Jesus ?
Jesus taught that ' religious truth ' is found in Holy Scripture - John 17:17
Jesus taught there would be people who worship God with truth - John 4:23-24
The international proclaiming about the good news of God's kingdom government - Matthew 24:14 - has come to pass on a global scale just as Jesus' recorded words show - Acts of the Apostles 1:8.
So, digging for religious truth ( spiritual gems ) is found in Scripture. - 2 Chronicles 15:2 B
What about when the history of Jesus began? Jesus taught his followers would Not be soldiers.
Jesus and his first-century followers were politically neutral in the world's affairs.
They did Not even get involved in the issues of the day between the Jews and the Romans.
So, Jesus' modern-day followers would also remain neutral.
No followers of Jesus will pick up any military sword - Matthew 26:52; Revelation 13:10
On the other hand, false clergy have often wrongly used the pulpit as a recruiting station so parents will sacrifice their young on the Altar of War as if it is the Altar of God.
False clergy often put words in Jesus' mouth that never came out of his mouth as if they are some sort of holy ventriloquists to further their own agenda, often political, instead of Jesus' spiritual agenda of Matthew 28:18-20; Matthew 24:14; Acts of the Apostles 1:8.
If Jesus could save the life of 'his kids' (us) at the cost of his life, there is No question whatsoever.
Because the word ' father ' means: life giver, and Jesus was given the resurrection power, then Jesus has the title of ' everlasting father ' ( everlasting life giver ) - Isaiah 9:6.
Starting with Day One of Jesus' coming 1,000-year reign over Earth mankind will see his resurrection power - Revelation 1:18
According to Scripture, wasn't mankind to 'fill ' (populate) the earth - Genesis 1:28
Is it having too many kids, or irresponsibly having children ?
The cause of war is mentioned by James at James 4:1-3; James 4:4
You are correct in that regard. Jesus never laid claim to coming for peace but with "a sword" as He put it. And also He when asked if His Kingdom was of this world He said it was not and to render to Caesar what was Caesars and God what is God's.
Yet at Christmas time they refer to Christ as 'unto us a child is born, the prince of peace, the government shall be upon his shoulders. Etc
Christians do not realise that that passage speaks about Baha'u'llah not Christ as it is Baha'u'llah's mission to bring world peace and He has also brought a World Order so the government is on His not Christ's shoulders.
The reason most Christians do not understand these things is they follow their clergy.
Muffled
Jesus in me
Can you present me the login in a God?
So the bible doesn't present God's words?
So God didn't promise to not destruct humanity and the earth again? Oh.. He meant that maybe only by water..
I believe He said it. Did you think the "by water" was an accident. The next one is by fire.
I believe that conclusion does not follow from the premise. I believe God's words are in the Bible.
I believe I could but I won't.
Etritonakin
Well-Known Member
The best religion would be based on the true nature of reality -and move people toward the best possible outcome.
Part of the true nature of reality is that humans are essentially born ignorant, live relatively short lives and precede generation after generation of humans who are also essentially born ignorant.
It is necessary for humans to seek knowledge and understanding, and pass as much on to the next generation as possible -so the least is spent learning the same things.
The best religion would be that which was given/required by an all-knowing God which actually existed -and had the best interest of all at heart.
It would involve access to knowledge from the perspective of that God -and would provide a basis for proper conduct which maintained peace and order as things were learned and more things were created which could then be learned.
It would involve data hiding so that good things could be accomplished without the necessity of complete initial understanding -and maintain peace and order while understanding was gained.
It would acknowledge initial ignorance and involve a plan to move people and things from an initial state to the most desirable end or continuing state as efficiently as possible.
It would provide valid reasons for all individuals to adhere to it -the greatest of which would be the removal of the possibility of undesirable states, and creation of a delightful situation and the eternal continuation thereof.
Part of the true nature of reality is that humans are essentially born ignorant, live relatively short lives and precede generation after generation of humans who are also essentially born ignorant.
It is necessary for humans to seek knowledge and understanding, and pass as much on to the next generation as possible -so the least is spent learning the same things.
The best religion would be that which was given/required by an all-knowing God which actually existed -and had the best interest of all at heart.
It would involve access to knowledge from the perspective of that God -and would provide a basis for proper conduct which maintained peace and order as things were learned and more things were created which could then be learned.
It would involve data hiding so that good things could be accomplished without the necessity of complete initial understanding -and maintain peace and order while understanding was gained.
It would acknowledge initial ignorance and involve a plan to move people and things from an initial state to the most desirable end or continuing state as efficiently as possible.
It would provide valid reasons for all individuals to adhere to it -the greatest of which would be the removal of the possibility of undesirable states, and creation of a delightful situation and the eternal continuation thereof.
Jonathan Ainsley Bain
Logical Positivist
Have you ever looked at a dog and said 'bad dog'?
Have you ever said 'good dog'?
Would you rather be a dog or a horse?
Which dog? A collie or a wiener-dog?
WHICH collie??
Jonathan Ainsley Bain
Logical Positivist
Bad horsies buck their riders.
Good horsies trot nicely.
Can't say I think prawns are all that good, generally I prefer snoek.
Jonathan Ainsley Bain
Logical Positivist
As I recall past lives, it is logical that other cognitive beings also have past lives.
The past is easily forgotten, however.
Agreed.
Not necessarily. You discount reincarnation.
Agreed.
You're assuming that such a being must necessarily exist..
Jonathan Ainsley Bain
Logical Positivist
Well in the time of Genesis, the world was much more empty than it is today.
psychoslice
Veteran Member
I myself don't believe in the so called past, there is only here and Now.
Jonathan Ainsley Bain
Logical Positivist
When you wrote that it was in response to something said in your past by me.
Can you imagine how confusing and annoying it would get if we could remember
all lives going back trillions of years before this universe even started?
psychoslice
Veteran Member
No its all here and Now, and who wants to remember something that is dead ?.