which is the correct religion to follow ???

Originally posted by chinking58
I agree with checkbaitor that religion is a manmade organization whereby we try to work our way toward God. In that sense, we don't really need one, because God, without any religion, has reached out to man. <snip>

A new trend among christians is to claim they are not religious. It is a way of making a very old belief system seem fresh again.

However, the quoted paragraph above is certainly at odds with the definition of the word religion.

From www.m-w.com:
Entry: re·li·gion
Pronunciation: ri-'li-j&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English religioun, from Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back -- more at RELY
1 a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

There is only one mention of man 'working' his way to god ('service' in def. 1b). A person who merely has faith in god can properly be called 'religious'.

Originally posted by FORESTNYMPH
i would like to hear a debate on which religion is the correct one to follow. i myself am non-denomination and i believe in God.

It all depends on what you want.

If you want to feel a certain comfort, a certain consolation, a certain safety within the numbers of spiritual community, then you can find that in any of the major organized religions.

If you want to recognize deeper spiritual truths beyond mere dogma, or beyond mere righteous exclusivity ( "OUR religion is correct, all others are false" ), then you will have to expand your search. You will have to become a "seeker of truth".

To be a seeker of truth is a wonderful journey, because in the very seeking your ability to discern truth slowly begins to develop, in accordance with your sincerity of intention. The more sincere your search for truth, the more stones you turn over, the more results will appear.

You might be aware of the Grail myth of the King Arthur legends. In one form of this myth, the Holy Grail -- which is a symbol of ultimate spiritual wisdom -- is the aim of a group of wandering knights in a wasteland who are all looking for it. At the end of it all, only one knight succeeds in finding this Grail, because he has the purity of heart -- the sincerity of intent -- to get him there.

"Many will be called, few are chosen" is a line echoed in many spiritual paths, in one form or another. Those "chosen" are those who truly want to know the truth. They are not satisfied with dogma or doctrine, unless such truly aids their search. But they will not accept something only because some religious "authority" said it is so.

History is full of examples of young men doing foolish or destructive things in the name of some religion or religious authorities telling them to do so because this is how God will love them or accept them into paradise. But this happens because it's very easy to allow oneself to fall under the influence of the voices of establishment, and in particular the establishment of religion.

So it's great that you even ask this question, as this indicates the heart of a true seeker. Just keep nurturing the seeking spirit, and don't be satisfied with pat answers about God or truth. Read the available information, but never be motivated by fear -- the "follow this way or else" credo. Keep looking deeper and deeper into matters, and your searching will gradually be rewarded in ways that only you can know.

My own suggestions of some excellent texts to consult, are

The Tao Te Ching, by Lao Tzu (the sourcebook of Taoism)

The Dhammapada (source book of Buddhism)

anything by the 18th century Japanese Zen master Hakuin Ekaku

anything by the Christian mystics Meister Eckardt or Jacob Boehme

writings by the Sufi mystic Kabir

writings by the Jewish Hassidic mystic Baal Shem Tov

the teachings of the Advaita sage Ramana Maharshi

I've personally found these men to have penetrated to the deepest spiritual realities and truths, into what is generally called the "non-dual" realm.

Just my personal suggestions. Good luck in your search.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
A new trend among christians is to claim they are not religious. It is a way of making a very old belief system seem fresh again.

However, the quoted paragraph above is certainly at odds with the definition of the word [b]religion.

From www.m-w.com:
Entry: re·li·gion
Pronunciation: ri-'li-j&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle Eng ...[text shortened]... ervice' in def. 1b). A person who merely has faith in god can properly be called 'religious'.[/b]

I see your point, by the definition of the word....but I am not trying to make something old look fresh....and where the definition of religion as stated, it may not apply, because aside from some basic truths, mine tend to change when, I believe, God reveals something new to me.

By the way...How do you people out there change your font from bold to reg and visa versa? Can anyone help me here?

Originally posted by checkbaiter
I see your point, by the definition of the word....but I am not trying to make something old look fresh....and where the definition of religion as stated, it may not apply, because aside from some basic truths, mine tend to change when, I believe, God reveals something new to me.

By the way...How do you people out there change your font from bold to reg and visa versa? Can anyone help me here?

By the way...How do you people out there change your font from bold to reg and visa versa? Can anyone help me here?

When you are busy posting, check the section under "previous post". I can't type it out exacly, otherwise it will just make the text bold, but it's got something to do with putting a "b" or an "i" in "[ ]" then rounding it off with "[/*]" the * being a "b" or "i". Hope this helps.

Originally posted by Halitose
[b]By the way...How do you people out there change your font from bold to reg and visa versa? Can anyone help me here?

When you are busy posting, check the section under "previous post". I can't type it out exacly, otherwise it will just make the text bold, but it's got something to do with putting a "b" or an "i" in "[ ]" then rounding it off with "[/*]" the * being a "b" or "i". Hope this helps.[/b]

[*Thanks..Halitose..couldn't quite figure that one out.*]
Let's see if it works....

Originally posted by checkbaiter
[*Thanks..Halitose..couldn't quite figure that one out.*]
Let's see if it works....

[MMMMMMM/]

Originally posted by checkbaiter
[MMMMMMM/]

[one more time*/]

Originally posted by checkbaiter
[one more time*/]

No. No. Okay remove the "@" in the following sentence: [@b]Testing one, two, three![@/b]

and you get:

Testing one, two, three!

Originally posted by checkbaiter
[b]Thanks again, how did you ever figure that out?[/b]

It took me a while as well. I noticed it while typing a response, you have a text box with the previous post you are quoting belom, it kinda uses that [] system.

Originally posted by Halitose
It took me a while as well. I noticed it while typing a response, you have a text box with the previous post you are quoting belom, it kinda uses that [] system.

Your a genius!!

Originally posted by Halitose
It took me a while as well. I noticed it while typing a response, you have a text box with the previous post you are quoting belom, it kinda uses that [] system.

Gave you a rec.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
Your a genius!!

Maybe there was a memo that we both missed.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
Gave you a rec.

Thanx! 😉