2 of 2
2
The Reliigion of Peace
Posted: 29 July 2013 02:36 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1283
Joined  2011-03-12

Hundreds of denominations and differing interpretations do not prove demonstrably false the idea that the true message of Christ has been present in the world since the time he proclaimed it.

Actually, it does. All of them claim to be “THE One True Faith And All Others Are False.” All of them claim to be the guardians of what you call “the true message of Christ.”

In view of their vast differences of opinion as to exactly what that “true message of Christ” happens to be, it stands to reason that the vast majority of these people are gravely mistaken.

It was the teachings of Jesus, who claimed to be the the Jewish Messiah, that eventually sent the message of salvation from sin and reconciliation with God to all nations.

No it was not. It was the deciples and then predominantly Paul…who is the inventor of the faith as we understand it for the most part…who sent some sort of message out. Whether or not any part of came from Yeshua Bar Yosef…if the man even existed in the first place….is something we will never know because Yeshua never left anything in writing by his own hand to check against the claims made on his behalf.

And please be aware that there were all kinds of different sects with vastly different ideas about what this “True Message Of Christ” was, the Gnostics being the most prominent among them and known to us only because their writings survived. The rest ended up on a bonfire somewhere and what little we know about them comes from hostile witnesses.

 Signature 

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 July 2013 03:26 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  514
Joined  2010-11-21
Lois - 21 July 2013 06:30 AM

This is the manifesto of The Religion of Peace.  What do you think of it? 


http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/AboutSite.htm

This was a good take on Islam. I think, though, that every religion has equal potential for such behavior. Lilly’s apologetic impression of Christianity only reflects her particular non-Catholic view. While I agree that it’s better to have a tamer and less harmful religion, any religion presupposes an absolute authority on truth that has a relative impact on others external to it who do not believe and on those within it who are aroused to skepticism. While many religions recognize freedom of conscience, it doesn’t extend to acting on that conscience. This seems fair by a religion in political favor because as long as their religion is allowed action according to their conscience, there’s nothing to complain about from their perspective. Freedom of conscience alone isn’t sufficient to safeguard religious abuse. Freedom from active policy making based on religious justification is necessary.

 Signature 

I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 July 2013 12:34 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2245
Joined  2012-10-27
LilySmith - 26 July 2013 12:51 PM
Lois - 26 July 2013 11:53 AM

All religions take that tack. Islam has simply taken it to the extreme and has adamantly refused to grow and change.

All religions take what tack? All religions are different and have different teachings.  The idea that all religions evolve is nonsense.  A religion is what it is.  Christianity has not changed in 2,000 years since Christ handed down its truths.  Islam hasn’t and won’t change since Muhammad proclaimed his revelation from God.  The idea that someday Islam will evolve into Christianity is foolishness by people who don’t know the fundamentals of the two religions.  Some groups may veer from the teachings of their claimed religion,  some may add or subtract from the religion, but when they have a revealed message that is written and preserved, the teachings cannot change.

The tack they take is that their religion is one of peace—as long as it’s embraced and followed to the nth degree. Woe betide anyone who makes a mistake or considers leaving it.  And people who have never embraced it are fair game for all the “peace” the religion claims.

Even Christianity takes this tack, though at this stage in it’s development it is no longer kiling and maiming people for not embracing it, as it did in the Inquisition. However, it still claims that anyone who doesn’t embrace Christianity (and often just a certain brand of Christianity) will be condemned to eternal damnation. But it still claims to be a compassionate and fair religion, as does Islam. I guess it all depends on one’s definition of such words as peace, compassionate and fair.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 July 2013 12:51 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2245
Joined  2012-10-27
LilySmith - 27 July 2013 01:27 PM

Mike,

Perhaps Bartholomew’s beliefs have changed into something unrecognizable from the Christian faith, but I can tell you that my beliefs have not.  I can go back and read the writings of the early church fathers from as early as the 2nd century and agree with them completely.  I have no doubt that many people have added and subtracted from the Christian faith to embrace a faith that is not Christian at all, but the teachings of Christ that make up Christianity are the same as when Christ taught them.

Here are a couple of original thoughts from the Bible: 

1. God loves all mankind

2. Jesus is the Christ of God and the fulfillment of all that is written about him in the Law, the Prophets and the Psalms.

If you think religious beliefs in the Bible have evolved, you don’t understand what the Bible teaches.

I’m afraid you don’t know, either.  Some Old Testament passages are horrific, as are plenty of New Testament ones,  and Jesus is never quoted as distancing himself from the Hebrew writings that were the central part of the Jewish religion and became the Old Testament.  Jesus is quoted as saying he came to fulfill the prophecies of those writings.  He was born, lived and died a Jew and did not create a new religion.

So, as a good Christian, are you remaining silent in Church, and submit to your husband’s authority?  And do you ever eat meat and dairy together, and never eat pork and have you ever worn clothing made of two kinds of threads? I am sure you treat your slaves in accordance to the instructions in the Bible, too. Of course these are tame compared to other horrific passages in the bible that you are apparently following to the letter because you are following in the footsteps of Jesus who revered and followed the Old Testament writings and never said anyone should create a new religion.

Lois

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 July 2013 12:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2245
Joined  2012-10-27
LilySmith - 28 July 2013 01:57 PM
Thevillageatheist - 28 July 2013 05:08 AM

All Abrahamic religions have essentially The same agenda, I.e. to spread their belief system to all cultures.

Actually, the agenda of the Jews was never to spread their belief system to others.  It was about a promised land for the Hebrew people, and a law given them by God by which they were to live in that land.  Anyone who joined them must live by their laws as given to them by God, but they only conquered a specific land that was promised to Abraham.

It was the teachings of Jesus, who claimed to be the the Jewish Messiah, that eventually sent the message of salvation from sin and reconciliation with God to all nations.  But this was not to spread the belief system to all cultures, it is to call out from among the nations a people for God before God’s judgment comes on all nations and destroys all sinners.

Islam combines the two.  They are theocratic and want to take that theocracy and the law within it to all nations.  They want not only their own land, but the land of the Jews and Gentiles as well.  Their goal is to dominate the world and for all people to submit to Allah and his prophet Muhammad.

Jesus never claimed to e the Jewish Messiah.  Other people made that claim hundreds of years after his death.  Both Islam and Christianity are religions based on lies, misinterpretations, distortions and false claims.

Lois

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 July 2013 03:47 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  296
Joined  2013-07-25
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 29 July 2013 02:36 PM

All of them claim to be “THE One True Faith And All Others Are False.” All of them claim to be the guardians of what you call “the true message of Christ.”

I understand, but how does that show that the true message has not survived.  Even if the vast majority of people are gravely mistaken, that doesn’t show the true message of Christ is not believed by some.

The apostles, including Paul, took the message of salvation to the ends of the earth at Jesus’ instructions—his teachings.

If Paul is the inventor of the faith, he is an amazing man—a man who invented a faith based on someone named Jesus, said he was the Messiah, claimed his message would go to the ends of the earth, and here we are at the ends of the earth still discussing his message while all this time Paul doesn’t even take credit for it, but gives that to some man he made up named Jesus.  Uh huh.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 July 2013 05:58 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2245
Joined  2012-10-27
LilySmith - 30 July 2013 03:47 PM
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 29 July 2013 02:36 PM

All of them claim to be “THE One True Faith And All Others Are False.” All of them claim to be the guardians of what you call “the true message of Christ.”

I understand, but how does that show that the true message has not survived.  Even if the vast majority of people are gravely mistaken, that doesn’t show the true message of Christ is not believed by some.

The apostles, including Paul, took the message of salvation to the ends of the earth at Jesus’ instructions—his teachings.

If Paul is the inventor of the faith, he is an amazing man—a man who invented a faith based on someone named Jesus, said he was the Messiah, claimed his message would go to the ends of the earth, and here we are at the ends of the earth still discussing his message while all this time Paul doesn’t even take credit for it, but gives that to some man he made up named Jesus.  Uh huh.

The Islamic message has survived, too.  Does that mean it’s the true message?  The Jewish message is that the Messiah has not yet arrived. There are many Jews who believe that. We have hundreds of religious messages that survive today.  Who is to say which one is true or that any is true? That some people believe these things means nothing. Almost the whole population of the earth believed the sun revolves around the earth, even after Galileo.  Did that prove that a geocentric universe is true? How many people believe a premise has no bearing whatsoever on its validity. 

Paul giving credit to Jesus instead of taking it himself also has no bearing on the truth of his message. Paul may have been an amazing man, but that also has no bearing on the truth of his message.

Lois

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 July 2013 09:27 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  483
Joined  2013-06-01

LilySmith
If Paul is the inventor of the faith, he is an amazing man—a man who invented a faith based on someone named Jesus, said he was the Messiah,

Paul never invented the faith and either did Jesus. Paul was a big part of the evolution of the Christian faith.  The church used what was called foot note bibles that they could mark the changes needed in the text. Now come-on what’s that all about?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 31 July 2013 02:39 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1283
Joined  2011-03-12

I understand, but how does that show that the true message has not survived.

You have no way of verifying that it has because, quite simply, no primary sources of any kind have survived. Frankly, you can’t even prove that the person known as Jesus Christ ever even existed.

In that light, claiming that a message of his has survived is pretty damned arrogant.

Even if the vast majority of people are gravely mistaken, that doesn’t show the true message of Christ is not believed by some.

Given the conflicting opinions on what that 0ne True Message is, there is no “IF” abut it. If even one of them is right, the rest are absolutely wrong.

Even if this message of yours has survived somewhere, that doesn’t mean it’s mean it’s valid.

Really LilySmith, if you’re going to advance an opnion here, you’re going to have to do WAY better then to offer all the canned answers your pastor has brainwashed you with. There are too many people here who know the REAL history of the Abrahamic cults.


If all you have to offer is the standard apologetics, then you’re just wasting everybody’s time.

 Signature 

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 2
2