-
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!
Tell me about your religion
- Thread starter Reverend Rick
- Start date
cardero
Citizen Mod
Tell me about your religion
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=40597&highlight=Patrickism
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=40597&highlight=Patrickism
Agondonter
Active Member
I was inspired from within to plunge into the unknown; I had a vision of making the unknowable more than known, but realized in the inner reaches of my being. There, in the abyss of the unknown, I struggled and probed that I might comprehend the very essence of reality. I touched the edge of Realty, and found it to be He whom men call God.
I still hear the diminishing echoes of those who ask, Why do you inquire in the beyond? Be contented with the things you can perceive through the senses. Cows and dogs are, and there is no evidence that you can sense more than they. You are different than they only in degree of intelligence. But to have given up would have been to live at the same level as cows and dogs. I am more than that. What good does it do, they ask. Does it give bread to the hungry? No? Then what good comes of your inquiry into the beyond? These kinds of questions I now perceive as questions asked by babies who judge the whole universe from where they stand. But infinity must be judged by the standard of infinity. Is it logical to judge its value by its action on the limited range of physical sensation?
No more do I argue. Neither do I hear argumentation. God belongs to the supersensuous, not to the sense plane. He is beyond reasoning and does not belong to the intellect. The intellectual groping in the dark has given way to the light of intuitive perception. I sense, I do not, believe; I perceive, I do not reason. In God I find chaos, but amidst the chaos there is also harmony, a music composed especially for me, and me alone. When I hear truth, it penetrates into the innermost reaches of my being where it resonates as though the whole universe were standing up and singing, This is truth. And such truth stands on its own; it does not require the testimony of evidence.
I affirm the unity of Infinity, the ultimate oneness of all Existence, but also admit to eternal differences within It. Therefore, for all practical purposes, it is a monistic view that is also dualistic, keeping a distinction between the personal soul and the Personal God.
I still hear the diminishing echoes of those who ask, Why do you inquire in the beyond? Be contented with the things you can perceive through the senses. Cows and dogs are, and there is no evidence that you can sense more than they. You are different than they only in degree of intelligence. But to have given up would have been to live at the same level as cows and dogs. I am more than that. What good does it do, they ask. Does it give bread to the hungry? No? Then what good comes of your inquiry into the beyond? These kinds of questions I now perceive as questions asked by babies who judge the whole universe from where they stand. But infinity must be judged by the standard of infinity. Is it logical to judge its value by its action on the limited range of physical sensation?
No more do I argue. Neither do I hear argumentation. God belongs to the supersensuous, not to the sense plane. He is beyond reasoning and does not belong to the intellect. The intellectual groping in the dark has given way to the light of intuitive perception. I sense, I do not, believe; I perceive, I do not reason. In God I find chaos, but amidst the chaos there is also harmony, a music composed especially for me, and me alone. When I hear truth, it penetrates into the innermost reaches of my being where it resonates as though the whole universe were standing up and singing, This is truth. And such truth stands on its own; it does not require the testimony of evidence.
I affirm the unity of Infinity, the ultimate oneness of all Existence, but also admit to eternal differences within It. Therefore, for all practical purposes, it is a monistic view that is also dualistic, keeping a distinction between the personal soul and the Personal God.
ayani
member
What do you like best?
the emphasis on rememberance, and the refuge found in prayer
What do you like least?
as of now, explaining my faith to curious stranger and friends is difficult. i would like very much to have the faith and the words to express what i believe and practice clearly
What seperates your religion from others?
nothing, really. it is a devotion that i follow singularly, but i see no contradiction between the message of my faith and that of others'.
What is the closest religion to yours?
from what i have read, many Sufi practices sound very close to my faith. Quakerism, the Baha'i Faith, and Sikhi Dharma also strike chords with me, but at the same time they are very different.
What is the furthest religion from yours?
traditions' whose emphasis is based on evangelization and dogma, not on compassion or bridge-building.
Would you welcome people to convert to your religion?
yes, that would be fine. but God calls everyone in different ways. what brings His Word to me may say nothing to the next person.
What would be the biggest reason they should?
i would encourage people who are interested to seek, knock, and ask for their own. perhaps God will lead someone else to this small practice of mine, perhaps not. it is His will, and the ways He can shine through to us are innumerable.
the emphasis on rememberance, and the refuge found in prayer
What do you like least?
as of now, explaining my faith to curious stranger and friends is difficult. i would like very much to have the faith and the words to express what i believe and practice clearly
What seperates your religion from others?
nothing, really. it is a devotion that i follow singularly, but i see no contradiction between the message of my faith and that of others'.
What is the closest religion to yours?
from what i have read, many Sufi practices sound very close to my faith. Quakerism, the Baha'i Faith, and Sikhi Dharma also strike chords with me, but at the same time they are very different.
What is the furthest religion from yours?
traditions' whose emphasis is based on evangelization and dogma, not on compassion or bridge-building.
Would you welcome people to convert to your religion?
yes, that would be fine. but God calls everyone in different ways. what brings His Word to me may say nothing to the next person.
What would be the biggest reason they should?
i would encourage people who are interested to seek, knock, and ask for their own. perhaps God will lead someone else to this small practice of mine, perhaps not. it is His will, and the ways He can shine through to us are innumerable.
What do you like best?
Thinking for yourself.
What do you like least?
Idiots.
What seperates your religion from others?
It doesn't require faith. No rules of morality are needed. Morality comes from within.
What is the closest religion to yours?
Humanism???
What is the furthest religion from yours?
All Dogmatic religions. And religions that have a specific set of rules.
Would you welcome people to convert to your religion?
My religion is my own. I don't care what you do. Just don't force your beliefs on me.
What would be the biggest reason they should?
They don't need to.
Thinking for yourself.
What do you like least?
Idiots.
What seperates your religion from others?
It doesn't require faith. No rules of morality are needed. Morality comes from within.
What is the closest religion to yours?
Humanism???
What is the furthest religion from yours?
All Dogmatic religions. And religions that have a specific set of rules.
Would you welcome people to convert to your religion?
My religion is my own. I don't care what you do. Just don't force your beliefs on me.
What would be the biggest reason they should?
They don't need to.
Emanuel byler
New Member
deliver... For, look, all of everything there was gone. The human had pulled away. He knowed their faith. But He was possessed. Get it! It was powers. Took from this mortal body of His, out into the spirit land, and called back the spirit of that girl, that had been dead for hours. Out into that land... I'm thankful tonight to be acquainted with that same One Who can call the spirits from out of the spirit land back into the life. And He was standing there, Lazarus' grave. All hopes was gone. Lazarus had been dead four days and was in the grave, stinking. Look at it...?... They heard that Jesus... They went out...?... I believe...?... Born the virgin birth...?... Almighty God...?... There was God raising the dead. Yes, sir. Said He hungered. When He come off the mountain, looked upon the trees, there was no figs to eat. They said He was hungry like a man. I know He was a man hungry when He was look... But when He took five sandwiches and fed five thousand, He was God. That's right. That's true.
7 I believe it with all my heart. The Bible said that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself. He was Emmanuel. In other words, He was the expressed image of Jehovah here on earth, as Jehovah inveiled in flesh, living here on the earth, the only begotten of the Father, from His bosom. Notice, God becoming flesh that He might suffer the penalty of sin, for He was the One Who pronounced sin. He was the...?... One Who pronounced the penalty upon sin. And He couldn't have some individual person besides Hisself. It wouldn't be right for me to say, "My wife will take your place, my boy, my brother, anybody else." If I'm just and sovereign, I take your place. And God had to come down in His Son, Christ Jesus, to suffer. That's right. And God's Blood bled from His body. Yes, sir.
He's the same Jesus all the way through the Scriptures, the same Christ, all the way through. In the beginning, He was, in the middle of the Book, He's here: "Lo, I come: in the volume of the Book to do Thy will, O Lord." And in the end, He's "Alpha, Omega, the Beginning, the Ending, He which Was, which Is, and shall Come, the Root and Offspring of David, the Morning Star, the Rose of Sharon, the Lily of the valley." Why, He's just... That's just Him, isn't it? He--He's Emmanuel. He's the both the Root and Offspring of David. See? Now, His ministry carries on. Many people teaching the Bible as a history--history (which is very fine), that we learned in our seminaries and schools, which is fine. But brother, that's just what was; what about what's now? You can't find that in school. You don't know that by genealogy, you know that by kneeingolgy, on your knees before God.
0 But when He rose on Easter morning, He broke every shackle of hell, death, and the grave. He proved that He was God, Emmanuel. He raised on high today. Believeth thou this? He's the same yesterday, today, and forever. Believest thou this? He's here right now. Believest thou this? He's the One that's working among us. Believest thou this? I believe the Holy Ghost is circling this building now. Believest thou this? I believe we can heal every one of us right now. Believest thou this? Hallelujah.
And as soon as the apostles had crossed out all the fear and doubt, and gathered in the upper room, God gave them the baptism of the Holy Spirit. When It fell down, that was our Manna coming from God out of heaven, like a rushing mighty wind, filled all the room where they were setting. Cloven tongues set upon them like fire; out the building they went into the streets, and begin to preach and testify, God working miracles. Is that right? Our Manna... Now, did God lay some of that back? Peter said in Acts 2:30 and 38, he said, "Repent, every one of you and be baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins, for you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to them that's far off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call." Then today, if God's still calling, every man or woman that comes to the fountain filled with Blood drawn from Emmanuel veins, and becomes a priest, or a child, a born child of God, in the Kingdom of God, has a right to the original baptism of the Holy Ghost, not a mouthful, but a whole soul full of the same power that fell on the day of Pentecost. I'm not excited. I know where I am. Let me tell you something, brother. What the Church needs today, is not a newmayor of the city, or a new Democrat, or new Republican party. It needs an old fashion, God-sent, Holy Ghost revival, and the Bible Holy Ghost back in the Church again. That's what It needs. How marvelous.
7 I believe it with all my heart. The Bible said that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself. He was Emmanuel. In other words, He was the expressed image of Jehovah here on earth, as Jehovah inveiled in flesh, living here on the earth, the only begotten of the Father, from His bosom. Notice, God becoming flesh that He might suffer the penalty of sin, for He was the One Who pronounced sin. He was the...?... One Who pronounced the penalty upon sin. And He couldn't have some individual person besides Hisself. It wouldn't be right for me to say, "My wife will take your place, my boy, my brother, anybody else." If I'm just and sovereign, I take your place. And God had to come down in His Son, Christ Jesus, to suffer. That's right. And God's Blood bled from His body. Yes, sir.
He's the same Jesus all the way through the Scriptures, the same Christ, all the way through. In the beginning, He was, in the middle of the Book, He's here: "Lo, I come: in the volume of the Book to do Thy will, O Lord." And in the end, He's "Alpha, Omega, the Beginning, the Ending, He which Was, which Is, and shall Come, the Root and Offspring of David, the Morning Star, the Rose of Sharon, the Lily of the valley." Why, He's just... That's just Him, isn't it? He--He's Emmanuel. He's the both the Root and Offspring of David. See? Now, His ministry carries on. Many people teaching the Bible as a history--history (which is very fine), that we learned in our seminaries and schools, which is fine. But brother, that's just what was; what about what's now? You can't find that in school. You don't know that by genealogy, you know that by kneeingolgy, on your knees before God.
0 But when He rose on Easter morning, He broke every shackle of hell, death, and the grave. He proved that He was God, Emmanuel. He raised on high today. Believeth thou this? He's the same yesterday, today, and forever. Believest thou this? He's here right now. Believest thou this? He's the One that's working among us. Believest thou this? I believe the Holy Ghost is circling this building now. Believest thou this? I believe we can heal every one of us right now. Believest thou this? Hallelujah.
And as soon as the apostles had crossed out all the fear and doubt, and gathered in the upper room, God gave them the baptism of the Holy Spirit. When It fell down, that was our Manna coming from God out of heaven, like a rushing mighty wind, filled all the room where they were setting. Cloven tongues set upon them like fire; out the building they went into the streets, and begin to preach and testify, God working miracles. Is that right? Our Manna... Now, did God lay some of that back? Peter said in Acts 2:30 and 38, he said, "Repent, every one of you and be baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins, for you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to them that's far off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call." Then today, if God's still calling, every man or woman that comes to the fountain filled with Blood drawn from Emmanuel veins, and becomes a priest, or a child, a born child of God, in the Kingdom of God, has a right to the original baptism of the Holy Ghost, not a mouthful, but a whole soul full of the same power that fell on the day of Pentecost. I'm not excited. I know where I am. Let me tell you something, brother. What the Church needs today, is not a newmayor of the city, or a new Democrat, or new Republican party. It needs an old fashion, God-sent, Holy Ghost revival, and the Bible Holy Ghost back in the Church again. That's what It needs. How marvelous.
dawny0826
Mother Heathen
No, I have not attended a Pentecostal service where snakes are handled and couldn't give you the name of a single church that I know of that does this in the area that I live in.
Although, I understand the faith building and point of such an exercise...I think there are other, less drastic "exercises" one can do.
Too many times, I have to defend those who choose to speak in tongues. I've done so and don't find speaking in tongues disruptive. It's not an issue of WHAT is being said 99.9% of the time...it's the fact that in faith, you yield your tongue to the Holy Spirit, TRUSTING that whatever comes out of your mouth, is important between YOU and your Heavenly Father.
To each his/her own, I guess. And I'm not implying that you were offensive by any means. I think many people though, misunderstand WHY Pentecostals and Charismatics choose to speak in tongues.
I've been pulled out of sleep before abruptly and have prayed extensively, speaking in tongues, later to receive spiritual confirmation that my prayer and obedience was necessary for the spiritual edification of ANOTHER. You never know. I've had beautiful experiences w/ tongue speaking. I do NOT buy into the notion that one MUST speak in tongues to show that they've received the Holy Spirit. My former Pentecostal church didn't teach that it's necessary either. The Pastor's words were something ot the effect of "When you receive the Holy Spirit...SOMETHING happens within you. Change. You do feel SOMETHING and outwardly show SOMETHING whether it's verbal or emotional." I think most Christians can attest to this.
I was raised in a Baptist Church and there's much about the Baptist Church that I find beautiful and much that I find flawed, as with any religious denomination.
I'm leaning towards going back to the little Lutheran Church down the road from me. I find it to be a nice balance between Catholicism, which I'm very drawn to as well as the Baptist Churches that I've attended throughout my life. Sometimes, I'd like to "inject" a little more livelihood into the sermons but I am still able to worship in the manner that I feel comfortable. I'm more of an emotional worshipper. I tend to cry and pray silently moreso than jumping about although I find myself inspired by those who do get up and move around as opposed to those who sit stone cold and stone faced.
I don't really think that God cares as long as your heart is on Him.
One of the main reasons that I left the Pentecostal church that I've been attending is that I don't think they take the Lord's Supper/Communion as often as they should. Little detail.
Although, I appreciate the "full gospel" approach to the Bible and tend to take the same approach in my own translations, I do like a sermon where you get a bit of Old and New Testament. I think it's important to have a good understanding of both. The people in the Church are wonderful and the Pastor is family (literally...my sister is marrying his son) but it's not for me anymore. I tired of reviewing the same verses over and over, not implying that the message wasn't important...I just want a bit more.
Also, the church was so small, they lacked a grouping of Sunday School classes to meet everyone's needs. They had one class at an inconvenient time and I really do need to find a Church that offers a good couples or singles Bible Class.
So...that's where I am.
I'm not really part of any religious denomination anymore. I have a lot of "church hopping" to do. I vowed to raise my children in a church and this is a vow that I must keep.
kaysquared89
New Member
What do you like best?
It is a loving community, which emphasizes the power of forgiveness and in general, practicing kindness towards others.
What do you like least?
Trying to get others to understand my faith. Many people seem to think they know what it means to be Catholic, and it is giving them the wrong idea about us.
What seperates your religion from others?
We don't follow a direct interpretation of the bible like some do. We have the Pope as the head of our church and though we do not worship them, we have Saints which we use to pray through to God.
What is the closest religion to yours?
Um...well the Lutheran church was the first branch of Christianity off of Catholicism. Other than that I have heard that Episcopal Churches are very similar
What is the furthest religion from yours?
well, many religious share that same values of mine or were either ancestor to the church, or later branched off...so I'm not really sure, I don't know enough about others to answer that question
Would you welcome people to convert to your religion?
Of course I would.
What would be the biggest reason they should?
Because they really want to live and follow the teaching of Jesus.
It is a loving community, which emphasizes the power of forgiveness and in general, practicing kindness towards others.
What do you like least?
Trying to get others to understand my faith. Many people seem to think they know what it means to be Catholic, and it is giving them the wrong idea about us.
What seperates your religion from others?
We don't follow a direct interpretation of the bible like some do. We have the Pope as the head of our church and though we do not worship them, we have Saints which we use to pray through to God.
What is the closest religion to yours?
Um...well the Lutheran church was the first branch of Christianity off of Catholicism. Other than that I have heard that Episcopal Churches are very similar
What is the furthest religion from yours?
well, many religious share that same values of mine or were either ancestor to the church, or later branched off...so I'm not really sure, I don't know enough about others to answer that question
Would you welcome people to convert to your religion?
Of course I would.
What would be the biggest reason they should?
Because they really want to live and follow the teaching of Jesus.
the question is .........are all christians after the pure word of God?to tell others not to read a certain bible in my eyes would be wrong , because if we are after the pure word of God we would have to read many translations, i like to read many translations it leads to greater understanding . and for me i like this online bible it is very good . i would be very wary of a religious leader that said to me dont read it .infact it would be quite wrong for him to do that.
Read the Bible Online
this is one of the things i like best. http://www.watchtower.org/
cant think of anything at all
we have got out of BABYLON THE GREAT revelation 18;4 and we have allowed Jehovah God to take us in. and we are following the channel that Jesus is using matthew 24 ;45-47 and we are the only ones who recognize fullfilled bible prophecy and chronology regarding Jesus kingship in the heavenly kingdom goverment in 1914. Daniel 7;13-14 and we are the only ones making known all over the world about this established heavenly kingdom Daniel 2;44 matthew 24;14
cant think of any that come to mindWhat is the closest religion to yours?
zenzero
Its only a Label
Friends,
All religions are the same.
As religions are differents PATHS/WAYS to reach the same place.
Differences are only MIND creation and MIND itself is the SATAN which is missed by most
The mind is such that it creates differences everywhere between two people.
Same reason each religion is getting divided everyday by different individuals/groups within themselves because of the mind.
Every enlightened person talks of the same LIGHT but most sees the darknessbelow the lamp.
Here too instead of discussing differences it could be more fruitful to discuss similiarities.
Love & rgds
All religions are the same.
As religions are differents PATHS/WAYS to reach the same place.
Differences are only MIND creation and MIND itself is the SATAN which is missed by most
The mind is such that it creates differences everywhere between two people.
Same reason each religion is getting divided everyday by different individuals/groups within themselves because of the mind.
Every enlightened person talks of the same LIGHT but most sees the darknessbelow the lamp.
Here too instead of discussing differences it could be more fruitful to discuss similiarities.
Love & rgds
athanasius
Well-Known Member
May the Peace of our risen Lord Jesus Christ be with you May. I agree with you May, I would read many translations of the bible to study it. I personally own several myself, including a New world translation and a Greek- Hebrew -English interlinear. But we also have to look at responsible solid orthodox biblical scholarship. The reason the Catholic church would advise people against using the New world trandaltion(the Jehovahs witneess trandslation) is because there have been abosolutly no major Greek or Hebrew biblical Scholars, Protestant or Catholic that have ever endorsed this translation. Rather many biblical scholars I have read such have said it wasn't even a translation from the Greek but rather a transliteration and a poor one at that. Biblical Scholar H H Rowly said the watchtower translation was "An insult to the word of God"
The New world translation I have has some very faulty Scholarship in its footnotes and study pages in the back of its bible. On page 1578 they wrongfully show Jesus on a Pole or stake instead of a cross. They claim that the classical Greek word Stauros meant Stake or pole and not cross. They are right but they have one problem. The bible wasn't written in Classical Greek. The bible was written in Koine Greek which is hellinistic in nature. When it comes to the Koine Greek(Biblical Greek) understanding of the crucifixion the word "Stauros" can also be translated as "2 intersecting beams of equal length" according to the standard biblical scholarship in Scholar Gerhard Kittles Theological dictionary of the New testament. This is a standard work that Protestants and Catholic use on biblical commentary. Hence Stauros can be a Cross! Recent biblical and archeological studies have also proven this to be the case.
So the reason My Catholic church would not suggest using your Jw bible is because it isn't recommended by any biblical Scholars(Protestant or Catholic) as a good solid translation, it purposely uses the wrong Greek text(Classical) as opposed to Biblical Koine Greek so as to change important biblical and Christological facts and it ignores pawns itslef off as a purified translation?
If you want to study solid translations of the bible try the NASB Protestant version with deutrocanonicals or I recommend the Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition.
Sorry I had to be so harsh but I thought you need to know.
May the grace of the Holy Spirit shower upon you,
Peace to you in Jesus our Lord and King through Mary our Queen Mother,
Athanasius
the NWT is rendered from the original Greek language........... .......THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE ORIGINAL GREEK BY B.F. WESTCOTT AND F.J.A.HORT-1881 and yes as you say the inspired Greek scriptures were in the koi-ne(common) Greek of the first century of our common era. the NEW WORLD TRANSLATION is a very good translation .May the Peace of our risen Lord Jesus Christ be with you May. I agree with you May, I would read many translations of the bible to study it. I personally own several myself, including a New world translation and a Greek- Hebrew -English interlinear. But we also have to look at responsible solid orthodox biblical scholarship. The reason the Catholic church would advise people against using the New world trandaltion(the Jehovahs witneess trandslation) is because there have been abosolutly no major Greek or Hebrew biblical Scholars, Protestant or Catholic that have ever endorsed this translation. Rather many biblical scholars I have read such have said it wasn't even a translation from the Greek but rather a transliteration and a poor one at that. Biblical Scholar H H Rowly said the watchtower translation was "An insult to the word of God"
The New world translation I have has some very faulty Scholarship in its footnotes and study pages in the back of its bible. On page 1578 they wrongfully show Jesus on a Pole or stake instead of a cross. They claim that the classical Greek word Stauros meant Stake or pole and not cross. They are right but they have one problem. The bible wasn't written in Classical Greek. The bible was written in Koine Greek which is hellinistic in nature. When it comes to the Koine Greek(Biblical Greek) understanding of the crucifixion the word "Stauros" can also be translated as "2 intersecting beams of equal length" according to the standard biblical scholarship in Scholar Gerhard Kittles Theological dictionary of the New testament. This is a standard work that Protestants and Catholic use on biblical commentary. Hence Stauros can be a Cross! Recent biblical and archeological studies have also proven this to be the case.
So the reason My Catholic church would not suggest using your Jw bible is because it isn't recommended by any biblical Scholars(Protestant or Catholic) as a good solid translation, it purposely uses the wrong Greek text(Classical) as opposed to Biblical Koine Greek so as to change important biblical and Christological facts and it ignores pawns itslef off as a purified translation?
If you want to study solid translations of the bible try the NASB Protestant version with deutrocanonicals or I recommend the Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition.
Sorry I had to be so harsh but I thought you need to know.
May the grace of the Holy Spirit shower upon you,
Peace to you in Jesus our Lord and King through Mary our Queen Mother,
Athanasius
ACCORDING to one count, as many as 55 new English translations of the Christian Greek Scriptures were published between 1952 and 1990. Translators choices mean that no two read alike. In order to assess the reliability of the translators work, Jason BeDuhn, associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona University, in Flagstaff, Arizona, U.S.A., examined and compared for accuracy eight major translations, including the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, published by Jehovahs Witnesses. The result?
While critical of some of its translation choices, BeDuhn called the New World Translation a "remarkably good" translation, "better by far" and "consistently better" than some of the others considered. Overall, concluded BeDuhn, the New World Translation "is one of the most accurate English translations of the New Testament currently available" and "the most accurate of the translations compared."Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament.
Green Gaia
Veteran Member
Our welcoming, open attitude and our emphasis on personal exploration and thought. No dogma.
That we can be hard to find in some areas since we are not that large compared to some other religions.
We have no dogma, and allow people to think for themselves. We welcome wisdom and truths from any source, and don't condemn something just because it came from another religion. We don't use fear as an attempt keep people in line.
None, and all of them. Baha'i's have some similar ideas. For me, paganism and Buddhism. Any that love nature and seek compassion and justice.
Fundamentalist Christianity, fundamentalist Islam, Orthodox Judaism, Scientology... that's all I can think of at the moment.
Of course.
If they want a religion/religious community that allows them to be who they are and explore the mysteries of this world in an open and loving way without fear of condemnation for not believing exactly the way others do.
