On Religion

[waitasec]

Way to over generalizing here. I know a number of Christians, myself included, who do not claim that only the followers of a particular form of idea get the "benefits and rewards."

so how is
i am the way the truth and the life, interpreted?

if one replaces the with a then i would agree...

 

[turk179]

true, not every religion "excludes" non believers. but the largest, most influential/important ones do. and frankly, after christianity and islam, no one much cares about the rest. all you have to do is keep up with the news. none of the other religions are even close to touching the coverage christianity and islam are getting.

Really? And I thought SCHIZO's broad brushed comments were bad.

"most influential/important ones"?
"no one much cares about the rest"?
:biglaugh:. You need to get out more.

 

[fallingblood]

Give an example. The principle is the same every religion has special knowledge that the participants must adhere to in order to benefit from it in some way while others, outside the faith, are excluded from the imaginary benefit.

How would you know. You have said yourself that you don't read books, and that you are unwilling to actually do the research.

That fact that I am here telling you that Christianity is not the only way, and I am a Christian, shows that you are wrong. You can also look at John Shelby Spong, who was an Episcopalian Bishop (I believe retired now), and he would say that same.

One could even argue that Buddha would not have said that his way was the only way. You can find the same idea in both Hinduism, and Islam. Judaism is actually a wonderful example of how you're wrong.

If you actually were interested in knowing about this stuff, you would have done some research, instead of just coming here and voicing intolerance, and refusing to try to understand the opposition.

 

[fallingblood]

so how is
i am the way the truth and the life, interpreted?

if one replaces the with a then i would agree...

One could simply reject the statement as being from Jesus. Personally, I see it as most likely not being from Jesus as it is only attested to once, in a late tradition, and fits more along John's theology than that of Jesus.

One could also make an argument, using the NT, that all go to heaven. I have seen a few Christians make just that argument. That or no one goes to hell. Which is a position that is becoming more popular with Christians (at least in more modern societies).

That, or one can see the Bible as a nice guide, but not infallible nor the actual word of God.

Really, it is just one verse, that Christians do not have to see as infallible. Especially when one can make an argument that the Bible says otherwise as well.

 

[Riverwolf]

Oh, by the way, Schizo, you keep touting about life experience instead of books, because knowledge is useless.

A few things about that.

1. Life experience is knowledge. The medium for it's gain is different, but it's still knowledge, not wisdom.
2. This so-called "useless knowledge" is what gave rise to that computer you're using to spout about how useless books are.

 

[waitasec]

One could simply reject the statement as being from Jesus. Personally, I see it as most likely not being from Jesus as it is only attested to once, in a late tradition, and fits more along John's theology than that of Jesus.

One could also make an argument, using the NT, that all go to heaven. I have seen a few Christians make just that argument. That or no one goes to hell. Which is a position that is becoming more popular with Christians (at least in more modern societies).

That, or one can see the Bible as a nice guide, but not infallible nor the actual word of God.

Really, it is just one verse, that Christians do not have to see as infallible. Especially when one can make an argument that the Bible says otherwise as well.

no there are more...
the famous john 3:16 is another one.

not all people are as diligent as you are in your faith...
some grow up in it without questioning it,
others just take their pastors word for it and don't even own a concordance...
or even know what one is for that matter.

there is a reason why they are called the flock....they are mere sheep and called to be as sheep...and god forbid anyone question the word of god.

fwiw, you are the ideal christian but once this attitude about christianity becomes the norm...discussions like these wouldn't happen.

 

[BruceDLimber]

All religion seems pretentious to me. Every participant in any particular faith seems to exagerate their importance and the importance of the knowledge that their faith proclaims. Of any religion, only its participants are supposedly granted the benefits and rewards by the faith's central focus (eg. a deity). All outsiders who do not adhere to the faith are refused the benefits and rewards.

All religions are the same. . . .

Why does every religion exclude reward and benefit from those that do not share faith?

"Every religion" doesn't, as you'd know if you were to become familiar with the Baha'i Faith and its teachings!

Peace,

Bruce

 

[ChristineES]

This should be specific enough lets talk about Christianity.

You can talk about it all you want, I just won't be responding to it. Not all Christians are the same and not all denominations of Christianity are the same. And it is possible to see and understand a statement or a written verse in more than one way. It all has to do with interpretation. We can see the verses, we just can't see each and every interpretation of that verse. That is why generalizations never work, in any thing not just religion.

 

[waitasec]

It all has to do with interpretation.

:yes:

 

[Quagmire]

I don't read books...

"but here's what they are"...

... I'm not impressed by holy scriptures. I don't drink wine and become intoxicated by words--and that is what every holy book intends.

This is like someone saying, "I've never been to Paris, but here's what I think of it..." "I've never tasted wine, but here's what it tastes like...."

See the problem with that?

You're a man of words.

What else are we supposed to use to communicate with in an internet forum?

Try consider silence.

Try keeping your advise to yourself unless it's asked for.

Is there any wisdom in silence? Is all truth found in silence? Contemplate silence, the opposite of what you are used to, and then tell me if you have found wisdom.

Do you have any idea what making snap judgments about people you don't know and offering advise that wasn't asked for and that you obviously don't even follow yourself makes you look like?

Do it for years.

I have a feeling you've been talking about "silence" for years.

Can't do it can you?

No doubt in my mind I'm more practiced at this than you are.

Words are in opposition to silence. Words overpower silence. You feel like you have to speak (think) in order to live don't you? There's a heap a garbage to shovel into your mind.

And there's a heap of garbage to shovel out of yours.

I make moral judgments by what people tell me.

Ever considered trying to think for yourself?

I don't want to search endlessly through some scribble to find absolutely nothing.

Got that. You're the kind of person who would rather accept convenient answers from anyone who's telling you what you wanted to hear.

Now go and ask someone what they think I just said.

You have no idea what silence or wisdom are.

 

[Storm]

Give an example.

Unitarian Universalism. Neopaganism. Judaism.

The principle is the same every religion has special knowledge that the participants must adhere to in order to benefit from it in some way while others, outside the faith, are excluded from the imaginary benefit.

False.

 

[zuluniner]

By what criteria are you using the words influential and important here?!"

this is a question where no answer will satisfy you. because you dont give a crap about the response. you are set on combative mode and will reject any criteria i present...... but just for ***** and giggles... the criteria, is WORLD NEWS.


Who are you to say that it is incorrect that no one much cares about the rest?

I wonder what news coverage you watch (and suspect that the words "fox" and "news" might appear in the same phrase).!"

here is something you didnt expect......... im a liberal atheist. i never watch faux news. i get my news from NPR, BBC, CNN, EURO NEWS, and DW(deutsche welle)

You know although I am not a Christian I have a certain amount of respect for the religion and a lot of respect for Jesus as an example of how people should live... And I just can't quite imagine Him saying "No one much cares about the rest!"

your "imagination" or "impression" of jesus is flawed. he was absolutist. go read the gospels and get back to me.

 

[fallingblood]

i dont claim to be an expert on either religion, in fact, i am atheist, but i can at least say that i have read both, the bible and quran cover to cover, which is far more than what you have done. and you are the one who claims to be christian. how shameful.

I am a religion major. I am learning Greek, so I can read the NT in it's original language. I was a practicing Muslim for four years, and learned Arabic well enough so I could read the Quran in it's original language. Please don't try to tell me what I have done and haven't done.

Neither one of those religions are defined by those religious books. In fact, the first Muslims and Christians never even had either one of those books. If we look at the history of Christianity, at least (which is more my speciality), we see that many have rejected various books from the Bible. Just look at the Gnostic books or other supposed lost books. That in itself shows that the Bible, as it is today, is not the defining book for the religion.

More so, nowhere in the Bible does it state that a Christian must follow the Bible. And if you actually took the time to research the many different branches of Christianity, you will see that many do not take the Bible as infallible or even the word of God.

Probably the biggest point to show that a Christian does not have to blindly follow the Bible is Martin Luther. He, a leader of the reformation, someone who helped transform Christianity (at least some sects of it), and plays a huge part in the history of Christianity, rejected a number of books in the Bible, such as the Epistle of James and Revelations.

 

[fallingblood]

your "imagination" or "impression" of jesus is flawed. he was absolutist. go read the gospels and get back to me.

Maybe you should pick up a book on the Historical Jesus. John Dominic Crossan has a couple of good ones. E.P. Sanders also has some great books on the subject. Really, your impression of Jesus simply is not the best or most informed.

 

[Awoon]

Jesus seminar

 

[Cassiopia]

this is a question where no answer will satisfy you. because you dont give a crap about the response. you are set on combative mode and will reject any criteria i present...... but just for ***** and giggles... the criteria, is WORLD NEWS.

Perhaps you are correct that my post was a little combative. It does seem a bit like the pot calling the kettle black though...
As for world news being your criteria for the meaning of the words important and influential I think you need to be more specific. The world news does not define the meaning of words.

Who are you to say that it is incorrect that no one much cares about the rest?

I am somebody whose experience is clearly different to yours.

here is something you didnt expect......... im a liberal atheist. i never watch faux news. i get my news from NPR, BBC, CNN, EURO NEWS, and DW(deutsche welle)

You are correct; I didn't expect that. Apologies for misjudging you. However I watch many of those channels and don't come to the same conclusions.

your "imagination" or "impression" of jesus is flawed. he was absolutist. go read the gospels and get back to me.

Now you are the one who is misjudging or jumping to false conclusions. I have read the bible more times and more thoroughly than a lot of people, partly because of self interest, partly because I used to be a Christian and partly because I had to study it as part of my degree.
From your interactions in this forum alone it should be clear that not all people who are familiar with the bible come to the same conclusions or share the same opinions. If you want your personal interpretations of the bible to carry more weight with people you are going to have to explain why your views are any more reasoned than anybody else's.

 

[Breathe]

Every single faith proclaims that if you do not have this faith you are in some sort of trouble. From Islam to Buddhism to Christianity. It is a good philosophical question, Why does every religion exclude reward and benefit from those that do not share faith?

Wrong.
Simply wrong.

You've made far too many sweeping generalizations here.

 

[Riverwolf]

this is a question where no answer will satisfy you. because you dont give a crap about the response. you are set on combative mode and will reject any criteria i present...... but just for ***** and giggles... the criteria, is WORLD NEWS.

Oh, you mean that thing that likes to focus solely on the bad things, completely ignoring the good things, and therefore attempts to make the world look like a living hell simply because bad news makes more money?

Yeah, that's a trustworthy source of learning what's important.

 

[ChristineES]

The way I see it, before someone goes on a anti-anything crusade, they should at least know all they can learn about what they are attacking. I have a lot more respect for those who attack my faith who used to follow it or have studied it than those who never bothered to learn anything about it. That is just my opinion on the whole thing.