A world without exclusive religions: Can we do it?

Regardless, the people that particpated in the crusades were christians, and they did it as a christian endeavour, to recover christian holy land and have christian kings rule it.

Doesn't sound like a very Christian thing to do. If Jesus were alive, I don't think he'd lead that parade!

Without religion, Bin Laden would have never brought the towers down. He wouldn't have been taught by someone to hate christians.

If he didn't hate Christians, he would hate some other group or someone else. A man like him is full of hate. Your statement is like saying Hitler wouldn't have been such a bad guy if he wasn't taught to hate Jews. He was psychotic and delusional. If it wasn't the Jews, it would have been some other group..........

Originally posted by Excitable_Boy

Regardless, the people that particpated in the crusades were christians, and they did it as a christian endeavour, to recover christian holy land and have christian kings rule it.

Doesn't sound like a very Christian thing to do. If Jesus were alive, I don't think he'd lead that parade!

No one hates Christianity as some religion more than Jesus Himself. I am one of Jesus followers/believers. I have spent much of the last two years studying the Bible. Just because someone invokes the name of God does not mean that they are saved or part of the remnant elect that will be saved. The inquisition, the Crusades were done by people who chose man's ways over God's ways. There are some very specific commands that the Lord has given those who are His:

1. Resist not Evil - turn the other cheek. Sacrifice for others.
Those who kill by the sword must die by the sword and be numbered with the transgressors. I am very likely to be persecuted myself in the upcoming years because I will continue to tell others about Jesus even after it becomes illegal to do so. You will only be able to talk about some generic one-size-fits-all God so no one gets angry and blows someone else up. I think we have 1-3 years until this is an agreement in place around the world. Just wait until after the next set of battles/attacks using WMD.
People will be screaming for a truce and any agreement to stop it.

2. If you wish to be first in God's kingdom, you must serve your fellow man as his servant. This goes against everything in the fallen heart of man that wants to rule in empires and oppress others. For we fight NOT against flesh and blood (oops), but against spirits and principalities (Ephesians).

3. Acts 17:24 - much overlooked - God no longer dwells in temples made with hands. Jesus said He left the house of the Jews in Jerusalem Desolate. In 70 AD, the covenant with the natural Jew ended. There is only spiritual Israel composed of those who are circumcised in soul, not necessarily outwardly. There is no specific land that is Holy any longer.

All issues that are key to the believer now are spiritual within the heart of man in the new testament. Jesus never spoke out about the good or evil of any political kingdom of any kind. For two reasons:

1. Our kingdom is not of this world

2. The real problem is the fallen heart of man. The oppressive church organizations, empires, and nations are merely the outworking of that fallen, selfish, evil heart of man. Deal with that and those oppressive kingdoms don't happen.

For centuries, people have tried to bend the word of God to suit their personal ambitions and given a black-eye to those like me who want to follow the Word as it was written, without any traditions of men.

Jesus himself said that many will come to Him at the end and brag about all they did in His name that were not His way and Jesus will cast them off to Hell. Those who did the Crusades and the Inquisition are such people.
That was a work of man who invoked God's name to give it a perception of legitimacy. How vulgar does God consider that!

Whenever man uses some belief system or religion to justify himself, he always does it wrong, uses it to persecute other people, and commits evil in the name of God. My story of following Jesus is how he reached down to me, not that I reached Him through anything I did.

Everyone loves to bring up the crusades and the inquisition, two of the most evil campaings in all of history, to bring reproach to the throne of God Himself. I assure you that God had nothing to do with those horrendous periods.

Everyone loves to bring up the crusades and the inquisition, two of the most evil campaings in all of history, to bring reproach to the throne of God Himself. I assure you that God had nothing to do with those horrendous periods.

Amen brother! Greed and hate were the root cause of all that, wanting what someone else has or hating those that are different than you.

People like religion. It makes them less afraid of dying, and makes them feel superior to all the other dopes who believe some other nonsense. Human beings are tribal by nature, and religion makes them feel like they're part of a community.

Religion is going to be around for as long as there are people. Which may be another 1,200 years or so.

I am one of Jesus followers/believers.

Not posting on the Internet, you're not. You're just another one of those "pickers and choosers," who likes the general concept of what Jesus said but when it comes to the hard details, likes to re-interpret what he said so it's a little more convenient. Jesus spelled out a very tough row to hoe, and I can't say I ever met anyone who would qualify as a true follower.

Originally posted by Enkidu

I am one of Jesus followers/believers.

Not posting on the Internet, you're not.

Foul!

You don't know that. It's not cool to say such a thing, IMO.

Jesus spelled out a very tough row to hoe, and I can't say I ever met anyone who would qualify as a true follower.

With your hasty way of judging, how could you really know?



[edit on 3/15/2006 by queenannie38]

Taoism is not a "Religion of a book", even though it's image has been corrupted to that state today. In fact, that tradition has run it's course through basically all Religions Philosophy leaving any truth they might hold lost in a sea of linguistic misinterpretations, lies and confusion. This is perhaps the most significant reason why so many Avatars through history never bothered to document their teachings first hand. Neither Buddha, Pythagoras, Socrates, nor even Jesus left written knowledge which came from them first hand. Everything we know of them or their teachings comes second hand at best. This IMO is an extremely significant detail people should investigate for themselves. Tao is included in this as well and is made quite clear when one considers the paradoxical nature it's teachings.

For example: From the Tao te ching
The Tao that can be described in words is not the true Tao
The Name that can be named is not the true Name.

When considering Buddhism, mentioning sacred texts or written laws or rules is also a contradiction since it is "personal experience" which is said to be the only way for one to know the truth.

Jesus also left no written record, but was instead written about by those who allegedly learned from him or were inspired by him.

Pythagoras, who is given credit for major advancements in Math, Philosophy and Culture also leaves no first hand proof of his knowledge.

So on and so forth with Socrates and others. All of which leave us no first hand written account of what they supposedly gave to the world in the form of knowledge and wisdom. This also usually results in the lack of first hand proof of their teachings as well as proof of their actual existence too. Interesting pattern don't ya think????

Originally posted by managerie
No one hates Christianity as some religion more than Jesus Himself.

Right!

Everyone loves to bring up the crusades and the inquisition, two of the most evil campaings in all of history, to bring reproach to the throne of God Himself. I assure you that God had nothing to do with those horrendous periods.

No doubt. That is not why I brought them up--my reason is to point out that names mean nothing. To people (when actions contradict) and especially to God (who is no respector of persons.)

Originally posted by Enkidu
People like religion. It makes them less afraid of dying, and makes them feel superior to all the other dopes who believe some other nonsense. Human beings are tribal by nature, and religion makes them feel like they're part of a community...

Whoa there... I totally agree that people feel stronger in groups, but Christianity pretty much goes against human nature. Human nature basically derives from the two strongest impulses that we have, which are survival and reproduction. Sounds pretty reasonable eh? Both of these are crucial to the existence of humans.

But what Jesus taught completely undermines what human nature is all about. And that is the beauty of what He teaches. Jesus teaches humility, which is completely opposite of the "alpha male" concept. He also teaches to take sparingly and give generously. Jesus also warns against pre-marital sex and adultery. All of these teachings among other teachings of Jesus go directly against human nature, so would humans really sacrifice these things just to "feel part of a group"? Last time I checked, there are plenty of other groups to join such as mile high.

And to tell you the truth, if there was a nuclear apocolypse and everyone in my church died (God forbid), I'd still choose to worship God.

You don't know that. It's not cool to say such a thing, IMO.

Cool or not, it's true. I've read the New Testament. Jesus was very specific about what it took to follow him, and if you have the time and money to post things on the Internet, you're not doing those things. Simple as that. You have read the New Testament, haven't you? Because I know some Christians never quite get around to it and just get the "Cliff's Notes" version from their local preachers.

With your hasty way of judging, how could you really know?

Like I said, I've read the New Testament. You should check it out sometime. Luke, in particular, is very interesting. The Bible gets a little nutty toward the end, and it loses a lot of its plot, but it's generally clear enough for the average person to understand. Here, this is pretty straightforward. How does this not apply to you?

Luke 9:57

As they were going along the road, a man said to him,
"I will follow you wherever you go."
To another he said, "Follow me." But he said, "Lord,
let me first go and bury my father."
Another said, "I will follow you, Lord; but let me first
say farewell to those at my home."
Nevertheless I must go on my way today and tomorrow
and the day following; for it cannot be that a prophet
should perish away from Jerusalem.'
And they will say to you, `Lo, there!' or `Lo, here!' Do
not go, do not follow them.
And when Jesus heard it, he said to him, "One thing
you still lack. Sell all that you have and distribute to
the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and
come, follow me."

You know, I'm tired of hearing this old crusades straw man. I'm Protestant, I'm being blamed for persecution my ancestors suffered, doesn't that sound outrageous? What if Someone five centuries from now says the Jews were to blame for the holocaust because Hitler was a quarter Jew? Wouldn't that be disgusting? Most of the crusades targetted MY PEOPLE who were preserving the textus receiptus the Catholic church hated so much. Waldenses, huguenots, Maverens, Anabaptists, Puritans and their leaders such as Peter Waldo , Wycliffe and so forth- all killed in the most brutal manner possible so some Christian basher can then somehow pin the blame on me instead of the perpetrator. The Catholic church isn't Christian, it is a pagan, superchurch system. "Holy water", priests, Pontiffs and Bishops, the bread God eucharist from Egypt, the Vicar concept which substitutes a fallible priest for Jesus Christ, purgatory, Masses for the dead, indulgences, crusades.....where can you pin these concepts in the NT? Answer: YOU CAN'T!! These are Babylonian concepts, and I can *easily* prove that. The Catholic church allowed the Bible to become a botched up mess called the Vulgate, and attempted to kill all those who kept the Greek originals. That my friends is the truth, and nothing you say can change those facts. Want to blame me for the crusades? I'm the one who's supposed to do the blaming!

[edit on 15-3-2006 by Nakash]

I don't know what churces yall go to, but mine does not exclude anyone. Any other individual who practices a different religion or lifestyle is welcome to hear about our beliefs and in fact encouraged too. And it isnt to donate money to the church, it isnt to go to war with another religion, it isnt to go out and start spreading hate to people who think differently, it is to bring you to a closer relationship with God, to educate you about the teachings of Christ, and to educate about the bible.

Kwintz and those who believe religion itself cause problems are generalizing. Just the ame way the KKK generalizes about black people being inferior and criminals scum, the same way the NAZIS/Hitler generalized about Jews being the source of the worlds problems.

You believe that religion is the cause of war, famine, plague and corruption. War has always, and will always be about real estate, natural resources, and MONEY. Religion was only used after being twisted into a false doctrine by false leaders of that religion. When war has ever involved religion it was only used to disguise to true intent which was for the purpose of the gaining of wealth. Each time it was used it was in direct conflict with the core beliefs, hence the religion itself was not the cause of such wars.

If the core beliefs of a religion, or any belief for the matter are in direct conflict with what a certain person is portraying it as, he is usually using it to further his own agenda, and it usually involves the acquistion of wealth.

We can see such examples today using non-religious belief systems. The current administration went to war in Iraq due to the danger it posed to the world. Now that government is in control of a large piece of land which holds a large pool of valuable resources. This land can easily be used to launch acquisitions of wealth and more land in the sourrounding region.

when yall use your examples of history of when religion was a cause of war, it pretty much was always in diect conflict with its true beliefs.

Originally posted by mOjOm
Taoism is not a "Religion of a book", even though it's image has been corrupted to that state today. In fact, that tradition has run it's course through basically all Religions Philosophy leaving any truth they might hold lost in a sea of linguistic misinterpretations, lies and confusion. This is perhaps the most significant reason why so many Avatars through history never bothered to document their teachings first hand. Neither Buddha, Pythagoras, Socrates, nor even Jesus left written knowledge which came from them first hand. Everything we know of them or their teachings comes second hand at best. This IMO is an extremely significant detail people should investigate for themselves. Tao is included in this as well and is made quite clear when one considers the paradoxical nature it's teachings.

For example: From the Tao te ching
The Tao that can be described in words is not the true Tao
The Name that can be named is not the true Name.

When considering Buddhism, mentioning sacred texts or written laws or rules is also a contradiction since it is "personal experience" which is said to be the only way for one to know the truth.

Jesus also left no written record, but was instead written about by those who allegedly learned from him or were inspired by him.

Pythagoras, who is given credit for major advancements in Math, Philosophy and Culture also leaves no first hand proof of his knowledge.

So on and so forth with Socrates and others. All of which leave us no first hand written account of what they supposedly gave to the world in the form of knowledge and wisdom. This also usually results in the lack of first hand proof of their teachings as well as proof of their actual existence too. Interesting pattern don't ya think????

Exactly, Taoism existed long before the Tao Te Ching or I Ching were written. Although many people think of them as the Taoist "bible" they are not. Taoism is not a religion that centers around belief or a creed. A book on Taoism is in fact, a violation of the spirit of Taoism. However many great Taoists have written book and although they contain great wisdom and may help you on your way that are by no means a set of rules or the only path to enlightenment.

[edit on 15-3-2006 by deadboi]

Originally posted by Enkidu
I can't say I ever met anyone who would qualify as a true follower.

When I read about Jesus's followers, oy vay I say! His closest friends, his disciples, could not always understand his thinking, his teachings, so frustrating. One betrayed him, one denied that he knew him--with friends like these who needs enemies we might say today.
Ah, the following is difficult, but that is the path we must choose. Look at what people do, not necessarily what they say. Like Jesus finding those who are true followers, besides his disciples, (a widow, a convicted man next to him on a cross, et al), you will find those who walk the walk on the Path.

Love one another, and don't despair.

Should I be suspisious that when there is a thread going on "Dozens of children sacrificed to goddess", that has people 'demanding' we don't "judge" it as "wrong" or "evil", you would chose to 'praise' Eastern religions, this 'goddess' belongs to?

Well I am anyway.

As to Christianity being "exclusive"; there are still two mass ressurections to come before anyone, who has ever lived, could claim to be excluded from being 'saved', and that's only if they so chose, upon being truely enlightened to the whole truth.

This whole idea is moronic - last I heard anyone can convert and become a Christian, a follower of Judaism, or a follower of Islam - these religions exclude no one and all are welcome to convert if they so desire. So they are not exclusive to anyone.

Gee, lets for a moment consider a world without Christianity.

We would still have wonderful religions like that of the Aztecs - who in the dedication of a single temple murdered 80,000 people as sacrifices to the gods!

We would have no hospitals or charities to aid the poor and infirmed (unless of course you were one of the ruling elite).

We would still have worldwide famines - as it was Catholic Monks in monestaries who dedicated their lives to genetically modifying crops to end world hunger and all done not for wordly gain - but for the love of fellow man.

We would still practice the axiom of love your fellow citizen, but hate your enemy (something that we are reverting back to as we drift furhter and further away from true Christianity).

There would be no one like St. Francis of Assisi - a rich young man with the world by the rump - who would give up all his wealth and fame - to live in total poverty and caring for those that the world abandoned -the lepars, etc... We would have never had nuns who gave their entire lives to caring for the sick - for no personal gain whatsoever.

Women would be nothing but sex slaves as they are in virtually all pagan religions.

Human life would be meaningless (unless of course you were a ruler or one of the elite) - as it was and is in all non-christian societies.

etc...


It is real easy to bash religions - especially when one only believes the word of the enemies of that religion.

People bash the crusades - THANK GOD FOR THE CRUSADES - if it were not for the crusades we would all be Moslems - people do not even realize the truth of the matter.

Today it is polically correct to bash Islam because we have been in a war for a few years with an islamic country - do they even realize the extent of the war that Islam waged on Christianity and Christian Europe?

Spain was at war with the advacing Moselms for 700 years - THATS RIGHT - 700 years! - and if it were not for Isabella the Catholic (Queen Isabella of Spain) - THE LAST CRUSADER - they would have won! The Spanish Crusades saved the whole of Europe from what it is facing now - EXTINCTION!

It was also under this great queen Isabella that the Spanish Inquisition was called and sustained - WITH GOOD REASON! If anyone were to study the REALITY and not the jewish and protestant bs versions - they would quickly see where the truth lies - but that would require effort and honesty.

The old saying:

"A fool convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still"

is an axiom that is very, very true.

Originally posted by Nakash
You know, I'm tired of hearing this old crusades straw man. I'm Protestant, I'm being blamed for persecution my ancestors suffered, doesn't that sound outrageous? What if Someone five centuries from now says the Jews were to blame for the holocaust because Hitler was a quarter Jew? Wouldn't that be disgusting? Most of the crusades targetted MY PEOPLE who were preserving the textus receiptus the Catholic church hated so much. Waldenses, huguenots, Maverens, Anabaptists, Puritans and their leaders such as Peter Waldo , Wycliffe and so forth- all killed in the most brutal manner possible so some Christian basher can then somehow pin the blame on me instead of the perpetrator. The Catholic church isn't Christian, it is a pagan, superchurch system. "Holy water", priests, Pontiffs and Bishops, the bread God eucharist from Egypt, the Vicar concept which substitutes a fallible priest for Jesus Christ, purgatory, Masses for the dead, indulgences, crusades.....where can you pin these concepts in the NT? Answer: YOU CAN'T!! These are Babylonian concepts, and I can *easily* prove that. The Catholic church allowed the Bible to become a botched up mess called the Vulgate, and attempted to kill all those who kept the Greek originals. That my friends is the truth, and nothing you say can change those facts. Want to blame me for the crusades? I'm the one who's supposed to do the blaming!

[edit on 15-3-2006 by Nakash]

Mind if I continue. The Catholic Church celebrates the birth of Christ on Dec 25th the birthday of the sun god. Celebrates the resurrection with the goddess Ishtar and her Ishtar eggs. Celebrates the pagan 40 days of lent.
Lights candles depicting the sun god. Has a pagan sun wheel and oblisk in the Vatican courtyard honoring Baal the pagan sun god. Had Valentines day as a religious holiday honoring St. Valentine. They weren't sure which St. Valentine they were honoring though. Since it is really a day to honor, Cupid, who is Erros, who is Nimrod, it doesn't matter. I could go on as I was raised Catholic, but a few of you should get the idea.

It wasn't Christians that were responsible for the crusades. It was the leadership of the Catholic church who were really pagans.

Originally posted by suzy ryan
Should I be suspisious that when there is a thread going on "Dozens of children sacrificed to goddess", that has people 'demanding' we don't "judge" it as "wrong" or "evil", you would chose to 'praise' Eastern religions, this 'goddess' belongs to?

Isn't that like judging all Christians because of the things that people who worship Satan do? Or heck even the people who claim to be doing "Gods work", the Klan for example. You can't judge an entire religion based on radical extremists.

Originally posted by Enkidu

You don't know that. It's not cool to say such a thing, IMO.

Cool or not, it's true. I've read the New Testament. Jesus was very specific about what it took to follow him, and if you have the time and money to post things on the Internet, you're not doing those things. Simple as that. You have read the New Testament, haven't you? Because I know some Christians never quite get around to it and just get the "Cliff's Notes" version from their local preachers.

With your hasty way of judging, how could you really know?

Like I said, I've read the New Testament. You should check it out sometime. Luke, in particular, is very interesting. The Bible gets a little nutty toward the end, and it loses a lot of its plot, but it's generally clear enough for the average person to understand. Here, this is pretty straightforward. How does this not apply to you?

Luke 9:57

As they were going along the road, a man said to him,
"I will follow you wherever you go."
To another he said, "Follow me." But he said, "Lord,
let me first go and bury my father."
Another said, "I will follow you, Lord; but let me first
say farewell to those at my home."
Nevertheless I must go on my way today and tomorrow
and the day following; for it cannot be that a prophet
should perish away from Jerusalem.'
And they will say to you, `Lo, there!' or `Lo, here!' Do
not go, do not follow them.
And when Jesus heard it, he said to him, "One thing
you still lack. Sell all that you have and distribute to
the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and
come, follow me."

While I appreciate that you took the time to write, I don't think you understand the gospels much at all. Just because you "read" the new testament doesn't mean you even remotely understood it at all. The only reason I write responses to some issues dealing with Jesus and His doctrines is to explain it kindly to people who might otherwise not hear or, at best, get their understanding from very poor examples.

You have no idea what it has cost me to follow Him these last 27 months since. He has asked me to give up my career and switch to a lower level career and to move across country from a neighborhood I loved back to LA of all places. Those are the big ones, but there have been other costs to following his direct leading.

I have learned the hard way in studying God's word that, without the Holy Spirit guiding you, you can't get it much at all. It should not surprise us to learn that Jesus, who had 3 1/2 years to redeem humanity, would plan his actions (most of the miracles have a deeper spiritual lesson behind them) and words very carefully, including double meanings to apply to multiple contexts. In the book of Acts, it describes how the Holy Spirit opened the scriptures to the disciples. I had been a "Christian" since I was 10 years old, but the scriptures were not opened to me until I was baptized with the Holy Spirit in December 2003.

I will not argue with you further on this topic. You should watch your words. The sharp and unconsidered accusation often reveals more about the accuser than the accused.