Revising The Abrahamic Religions

[Shiranui117]

the Gnostic gospels were left out, the balance was lost.

The Gnostic writings and so-called gospels were left out because they espoused the cosmology and soteriology of an entirely different religion. For example, the Christ of the Gnostic writings very often isn't even human; He is usually either the Christ possessing the mind and body of the man Jesus, who is left to die on the cross while the Christ escapes back to the Pleroma, or else Christ's physical body is a mere illusion, since the Christ would never become incarnate in physical matter, which is evil in most sects of Gnosticism. Gnosticism teaches that the God of the Jews and the God of the Old Testament is an evil demiurge who has fooled himself and the world into thinking that He is God, and the true God is to be found in the Pleroma outside of the physical universe. Christianity, however, teaches that the God of the Old and New Testaments are the same God; the God Who created the world is the God Who saves us from our sins.

There was no conspiracy to cut out the Gnostic writings from the Bible. They were never included in the Bible by Christians because they were never Christian writings. They were writings that belonged to a different religion with separate traditions and followers and hierarchies and sects. Some Gnostics just happened to like the idea of Jesus.

Actually 13 year olds have their own minds. They just are not to closed-minded at that age.

Minds that are still very plastic and impressionable, and which have neither the wisdom of life experience nor the intellect of academic learning.

Texts do not tell people what to think unless the reader believes that the text comes from God anever mind the "and the Lord said" parts. You fail to understand how easy the weak mind can be indoctrinated and manipulated, which is why I am calling for revision, especially now..

You think the solution to our problems is just getting rid of anything that might be "problematic". That hasn't worked in all the times that authoritarian dictatorships have tried. The solution isn't censorship, but educating people and strengthening their minds and morals to resist their baser instincts.

This is a religious forum. I am talking about religious violence and prejudice. Eco issues are for an eco forum.

I know you're new here, but you should know that we discuss politics and the environment here too. My point is that you can't pin this all on religion and make Christianity, Judaism and Islam the root cause of all the world's evil. Crazy people will always be crazy and will continue to find channels for their craziness, even if we neuter, strip down, bleach and acid wash the Abrahamic religions.

What FB has just done with Nick Clegg is interesting An independent court to help Fb and other social media platforms make decisions as to which content should be included/excluded. The courts rulings are binding
Perhaps there should be an International court of moderate religious leaders , Abrahamic of course, whose job it is to interpret all those verses that encourage violence, hatred, divisiveness etc. and either change them, remove them or probably the best option, rule, in a binding way on the best way that they should be re-interpreted . The rulings would be binding on all Rabbis, Priests, Vicars, Imams and so on ...........and if the rules are broken that teacher/preacher is punished forthwith. Even if the verses cannot be re-interpreted then there should be added a modern day explanation why the verse is not appropriate in today's society. it would be a start

Apparently you've never been to a church or read the works of any theologian. Christians have been interpreting the violent passages in the Old Testament to serve spiritual and peaceful messages since the birth of our religion. Just read the writings of the Church Fathers, or the writings of any modern Catholic or Orthodox scholar.

 

[usfan]

I would have thought, given what you have just written that you would be in your element!

I don't mind correcting false narratives, and reasoning with facts and arguments, but trying to resist a juggernaut of propaganda, repeated loudly over and over is not of interest.

Imagine a black man trying to reason with white supremacists in a forum..

You've got you anti-christian narratives, and the overflowing hatred for anything, 'Christian!' .... there really is nothing else for me to say. Enjoy your beliefs.

 

[dybmh]

but you cannot vet the who and the who can change their minds at any time. Teachers and preachers can become radicalized at any time and spread that radicalization quickly,

My friend, I am sorry. This part. "you cannot vet the who" Oh yes. We can. Terrorism is a law enforcement issue. And even in the case of rapid radicalization ( please see below ), there is a way to identify terrorists before they attack. And it works. This is a recent terrorism plot that was prevented by US Federal Law Enforcement.

hyperlink >>> cnbc.com - Foiled Terrorist Plot: Santa Monica Pier, Apr. 2019

 

[Lionel Refson]

My friend, I am sorry. This part. "you cannot vet the who" Oh yes. We can. Terrorism is a law enforcement issue. And even in the case of rapid radicalization ( please see below ), there is a way to identify terrorists before they attack. And it works. this is a recent terrorism plot that was prevented by US Federal Law Enforcement.

hyperlink >>> cnbc.com - Foiled Terrorist Plot: Santa Monica Pier

But the "who" keeps changing. A moderate Imam or worshipper may turn at any time and they have the words of God right there to allow them to do so. A moderate may become radicalized because a fundamentalist christian attacked their mosque and vice-versa. the poison remains in the holy books IMO

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Given the strength of feeling that would emerge if we tried to ban the Abrahamic religions, I would propose setting up some form of global inter-faith assembly where the leaders of the three Abrahamic religions and their various schisms sit down and have to agree to remove everything in the texts which teaches any form of
1/ hatred
2/ social divisiveness
3/ violence to another person in any form and for whatever reason
4 feelings of religious/spiritual superiority and ownership of God
5/ Intolerance of any kind

These leaders will have to accept that they have a duty of care in allowing teachings that contain any of the above and must therefore take personal responsibility for any future use of these teachings. if they refuse to remove the teachings from the text then they should be put on trial, together with any person who in future uses the texts to spray bullets in schools, blow up innocents etc etc

We are currently facing extreme violence in the world, which has its roots in the teachings of the Abrahamic religions . There is a growing rise in fundamentalism on all sides. If we do not deal with the issues at their root, they will continue to grow and poison the minds of future generations. Whilst of course this approach will be met with cries of protest at the desecration of the holy books, I personally think it is more important to save lives than treasure hateful and divisive texts,
It cannot be free speech etc if it causes violence to another , a price has been paid.

This is my viewpoint. I would like to hear yours. Bear in mind that there might be now right now some young kid reading verses on why he should slay the non-believer, stone the blasphemer etc. The Bible and the Koran radicalizes in the wrong hands, with the wrong teachers. Why allow the ones that do the material to do that?

If you disagree why? if you agree, how could such an event be implemented?

Life is complicated. Get over it.

 

[allright]

Given the strength of feeling that would emerge if we tried to ban the Abrahamic religions, I would propose setting up some form of global inter-faith assembly where the leaders of the three Abrahamic religions and their various schisms sit down and have to agree to remove everything in the texts which teaches any form of
1/ hatred
2/ social divisiveness
3/ violence to another person in any form and for whatever reason
4 feelings of religious/spiritual superiority and ownership of God
5/ Intolerance of any kind

These leaders will have to accept that they have a duty of care in allowing teachings that contain any of the above and must therefore take personal responsibility for any future use of these teachings. if they refuse to remove the teachings from the text then they should be put on trial, together with any person who in future uses the texts to spray bullets in schools, blow up innocents etc etc

We are currently facing extreme violence in the world, which has its roots in the teachings of the Abrahamic religions . There is a growing rise in fundamentalism on all sides. If we do not deal with the issues at their root, they will continue to grow and poison the minds of future generations. Whilst of course this approach will be met with cries of protest at the desecration of the holy books, I personally think it is more important to save lives than treasure hateful and divisive texts,
It cannot be free speech etc if it causes violence to another , a price has been paid.

This is my viewpoint. I would like to hear yours. Bear in mind that there might be now right now some young kid reading verses on why he should slay the non-believer, stone the blasphemer etc. The Bible and the Koran radicalizes in the wrong hands, with the wrong teachers. Why allow the ones that do the material to do that?

If you disagree why? if you agree, how could such an event be implemented?

Given the strength of feeling that would emerge if we tried to ban the Abrahamic religions, I would propose setting up some form of global inter-faith assembly where the leaders of the three Abrahamic religions and their various schisms sit down and have to agree to remove everything in the texts which teaches any form of
1/ hatred
2/ social divisiveness
3/ violence to another person in any form and for whatever reason
4 feelings of religious/spiritual superiority and ownership of God
5/ Intolerance of any kind

These leaders will have to accept that they have a duty of care in allowing teachings that contain any of the above and must therefore take personal responsibility for any future use of these teachings. if they refuse to remove the teachings from the text then they should be put on trial, together with any person who in future uses the texts to spray bullets in schools, blow up innocents etc etc

We are currently facing extreme violence in the world, which has its roots in the teachings of the Abrahamic religions . There is a growing rise in fundamentalism on all sides. If we do not deal with the issues at their root, they will continue to grow and poison the minds of future generations. Whilst of course this approach will be met with cries of protest at the desecration of the holy books, I personally think it is more important to save lives than treasure hateful and divisive texts,
It cannot be free speech etc if it causes violence to another , a price has been paid.

This is my viewpoint. I would like to hear yours. Bear in mind that there might be now right now some young kid reading verses on why he should slay the non-believer, stone the blasphemer etc. The Bible and the Koran radicalizes in the wrong hands, with the wrong teachers. Why allow the ones that do the material to do that?

If you disagree why? if you agree, how could such an event be implemented?

 

[allright]

To original poster

I see so I should stop following Jesus and make you my God to tell me whats right or wrong

No thanks

Its very tempting but Ill stick with Jesus

 

[Lionel Refson]

Apparently you've never been to a church or read the works of any theologian. Christians have been interpreting the violent passages in the Old Testament to serve spiritual and peaceful messages since the birth of our religion. Just read the writings of the Church Fathers, or the writings of any modern Catholic or Orthodox scholar.

I don't mind correcting false narratives, and reasoning with facts and arguments, but trying to resist a juggernaut of propaganda, repeated loudly over and over is not of interest.

Imagine a black man trying to reason with white supremacists in a forum..

You've got you anti-christian narratives, and the overflowing hatred for anything, 'Christian!' .... there really is nothing else for me to say. Enjoy your beliefs.

So what exactly, if your religion is so perfect and non-divisive and is beloved by the other abrahamic faiths AND venerated as the only true path is your objection to my proposal

What FB has just done with Nick Clegg is interesting An independent court to help Fb and other social media platforms make decisions as to which content should be included/excluded. The courts rulings are binding
Perhaps there should be an International court of moderate religious leaders , Abrahamic of course, whose job it is to interpret all those verses that encourage violence, hatred, divisiveness etc. and either change them, remove them or probably the best option, rule, in a binding way on the best way that they should be re-interpreted . The rulings would be binding on all Rabbis, Priests, Vicars, Imams and so on ...........and if the rules are broken that teacher/preacher is punished forthwith. Even if the verses cannot be re-interpreted then there should be added a modern day explanation why the verse is not appropriate in today's society. it would be a start

 

[Shiranui117]

So what exactly, if your religion is so perfect and non-divisive and is beloved by the other abrahamic faiths AND venerated as the only true path is your objection to my proposal

What FB has just done with Nick Clegg is interesting An independent court to help Fb and other social media platforms make decisions as to which content should be included/excluded. The courts rulings are binding
Perhaps there should be an International court of moderate religious leaders , Abrahamic of course, whose job it is to interpret all those verses that encourage violence, hatred, divisiveness etc. and either change them, remove them or probably the best option, rule, in a binding way on the best way that they should be re-interpreted . The rulings would be binding on all Rabbis, Priests, Vicars, Imams and so on ...........and if the rules are broken that teacher/preacher is punished forthwith. Even if the verses cannot be re-interpreted then there should be added a modern day explanation why the verse is not appropriate in today's society. it would be a start

You're saying that change should be forced on our religions from the outside. If we hold our faiths to be the one true path (and we most certainly do), then to change that faith based on the whims of any man whether inside or outside would be to compromise our faith and forfeit the truth. And, under the hypothetical case that we do decide to change the way we practice our faith, it will be us who decides, not outside forces trying to get us to bend the knee. Millions of Christians, Jews and Muslims have died due to the whims of governments who decided that they didn't like our religion. They gave us a choice to choose between our faith or our lives. We chose our faith. The 20th century was the bloodiest century in history for Christians as millions of us were slaughtered by oppressive regimes. Even now Christianity remains the most oppressed religion in the world as we suffer under the boot of terrorists in the Middle East and communist authoritarians in China. Your scheme will inevitably lead to tragedies repeating themselves that are still ongoing.

You wouldn't decide that Hinduism or Buddhism should be forcibly changed to reflect your fancies. I imagine you wouldn't expect the same of the various paganisms and folk religions either. But if you decide that the Abrahamic religions should be open to being censored, altered and destroyed, then you open the floodgates for your cancerous authoritarianism to be inflicted on all other religions. If you decide that one religion doesn't have the freedom to believe as they do, then you've already decided that none of them should have that freedom. After all, is it really so different to force Buddhism to change than it is to force Christianity to change?

 

[Lionel Refson]

You're saying that change should be forced on our religions from the outside. If we hold our faiths to be the one true path (and we most certainly do), then to change that faith based on the whims of any man whether inside or outside would be to compromise our faith and forfeit the truth. And, under the hypothetical case that we do decide to change the way we practice our faith, it will be us who decides, not outside forces trying to get us to bend the knee. Millions of Christians, Jews and Muslims have died due to the whims of governments who decided that they didn't like our religion. They gave us a choice to choose between our faith or our lives. We chose our faith. The 20th century was the bloodiest century in history for Christians as millions of us were slaughtered by oppressive regimes. Even now Christianity remains the most oppressed religion in the world as we suffer under the boot of terrorists in the Middle East and communist authoritarians in China. Your scheme will inevitably lead to tragedies repeating themselves that are still ongoing.

You wouldn't decide that Hinduism or Buddhism should be forcibly changed to reflect your fancies. I imagine you wouldn't expect the same of the various paganisms and folk religions either. But if you decide that the Abrahamic religions should be open to being censored, altered and destroyed, then you open the floodgates for your cancerous authoritarianism to be inflicted on all other religions. If you decide that one religion doesn't have the freedom to believe as they do, then you've already decided that none of them should have that freedom. After all, is it really so different to force Buddhism to change than it is to force Christianity to change?

A great answer............to a different issue. I am not forcing any change. Re-read what I posted above.

If you decide that one religion doesn't have the freedom to believe as they do

If that religion believes that murdering the followers of another religion is acceptable in some way, or encourages their State to do so , then that is not acceptable and my proposal may just save lives. After all if the court i propose makes the changes and an oppressive middle-eastern regime continues to murder eg christians then it would be a great excuse to impose sanctions on them, especially because western powers would have to support the ruling of the court and moderate pressure would see to that
Saving lives versus keeping the religions from external interference.......it is a no brainer!

If you decide that one religion doesn't have the freedom to believe as they do, then you've already decided that none of them should have that freedom.

You are right. My only gripe is with the abrahamic religions because it is the abrahamic religions that hold within their teachings, violence, hatred and so on. There is little in christianity to be debated and removed, although I suppose the key issue is the assertion that Jesus was any more than a man. This is a fantastic thing for christians to believe but unfortunately Jews and Muslims do not and never will agree, until Jesus returns

 

[Lionel Refson]

This is a big clue for christians imo Matthew 18:2-5
take the advice of these verses. read the Bible not with intellect but with the mind of a child ., naive, looking for God. jesus has been a light in my life, but he is not God
Start at Gen 1 and then have a go at Am I Wrong To Think That There Is A God, But Not Operating In This World
if you want to that is. I am not telling you to do anything, just suggesting sensitive bunch these christians!!)