which is the correct religion to follow ???

Originally posted by Halitose
If you break this down, sonhouse, you are implying that 'man' is essentially his own god. If we all had an innate ability to determine our own faith and religion, Christianity [b]is definitely completely wrong, because Christians require Christ.[/b]

What I am alluding to here is the fact that 10,000 20,000 years ago
people didn't have to be TOLD who/what to worship if they sought
spirituality. They had the freedom to work things out for themselves
and if that meant they worshiped owls then so-be-it the village
shaman accepted thats your 'totem' or spirit guide. Now people put
themselves up to be INTERMEDIARIES between a person and some
god or other. They have created a heirarchy of godliness, with the
new shamen, priests, cardinals, shieks, whatever, between you
and god. Therefore now you stand in line and accept what ever line
of crap they feed you because more than likely your parents did the
same and their parents before them ad nausium.
That is not religion. That is an industry and like industry the chief aim
is to secure the conditions neccessary to keep the status quo.
Can't have major new paradims in the religion industry, oh no,
It was good for great great great great great great grandfather and
it must therefore be good for me. Never mind conditions are not
even close to those of even 400 years ago much less 2000, 3,000
years past. Never mind christianity used far more ancient myths and
grafted them full blown and then copywrited it, like the 7 days
creation myth, that one is on a cartuche in the Cairo museum which
I saw with my own eyes, proving yet another plagerism of christianity.
The muslims are no better and maybe even worse. Mohamed adapted
a son but then in another one of his hallucinagenic episodes got a
"vision" from god saying don't adapt, it messes up the family line,
like now you have another person not of the family who gets to share
in the inheritance, can't have that, no no. So now all of a sudden its
in the RELIGION not to allow adaption. I saw with my own eyes the
result of this, every kid who loses his parents gets put right into an
orphanage till 18 years of age, then bye bye, out the door. Not much
in the way of education, clothes, medicine, games, nothing but
grueling existance all their childhood. All because Mohamed had
another hallucination. What kind of crap is that? The same with
the very food you eat if you are Jewish or Muslim. Jews can't eat
pork or beef and milk together, for RELIGIOUS reasons, Muslims can't eat
FISH and milk together, for the same RELIGIOUS reason. what a bunch
of crap. Maybe 1000 years ago it might have made sense from a
medical point of view, now its totally irrelevant.
But do you think there would be some kind of conferance in either
of those religions to change ancient practices like those I mentioned?
The earth would rot and the sun go nova before anyone could admit
maybe mohamed or moses was actually WRONG.....

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]

If we keep in the vein that persists among those who deride 'religion' as a bad thing; those who consider it an epithet; then in order to say that we do not believe what we are involved in, is like that 'bad thing', then we must assume the word has been modified in the common use, and try to define what we do without that word.

If we go back to the old understanding that religion among men is a high and lofty thing; An issue of importance, respectability and serious commitment to reverence for God and His ways, then I'd be glad to say I'm religious. Then I would qualify that statement by getting more specific about which of the world's spiritual claims I think are the true and correct ones. (Only a fool thinks they can all be fully compatible.)

Originally posted by sonhouse
What I am alluding to here is the fact that 10,000 20,000 years ago
people didn't have to be TOLD who/what to worship if they sought
spirituality. They had the freedom to work things out for themselves
and if that meant they worshiped owls then so-be-it the village
shaman accepted thats your 'totem' or spirit guide. Now people put
themselves up to b ...[text shortened]... ot and the sun go nova before anyone could admit
maybe mohamed or moses was actually WRONG.....

Before God there is no heirarchy of godliness. If you are in a line where you are merely fed somebody else's interpretation of something, I would strongly question whether you are not in a sect.

On the Islam issue I completely agree with you. Muslims were originally required by Mohammed to pray towards Jerusalem, but when the Jews rejected Mohammed he changed it to Mecca.

The 7 day creation story being stolen from the Cairo museum by Christians? 😛 Any more data that can be analyzed, perhaps?

Originally posted by sonhouse
What I am alluding to here is the fact that 10,000 20,000 years ago
people didn't have to be TOLD who/what to worship if they sought
spirituality. They had the freedom to work things out for themselves
and if that meant they worshiped owls then so-be-it the village
shaman accepted thats your 'totem' or spirit guide. Now people put
themselves up to b ...[text shortened]... ot and the sun go nova before anyone could admit
maybe mohamed or moses was actually WRONG.....

What documents do you have describing the interactions of shamans and their shamees from 15,000 years ago in such detail? I'm impressed!

Seriously SH, I believe that people are people and always have been (since about 6000 years ago, by the way). As soon as there were questions about God, there were people who took advantage of the demand and came up with a supply of answers. People being people, many of them were unscrupulous and said whatever 'sold'.

But none of that truism means that there isn't a True 'religion', or whole set of correct doctrinal ideas. I believe there is. But even within that 'true religion' (Christianity, methinks), there are heretical ideas that come and go, there are quacks and fools and misguided teachers who do lead unthinking people astray. We must each be responsible for testing every idea we are told. We must study God's revealed Word for ourselves, to make sure it says what we are told it says.



Another thing.

What makes a rule 'religious' (and thereby detestable)?
Moses told the newly freed Israelites to go to the 'bathroom' outside the camp. This was given to him by God. Should such a law be erased because it's source was 'religious'?

'Thou shalt not murder' also had a religious source, but I think we'll keep that one. My point is that all of God's laws are simply practical guides for the healthy life of mankind. I won' speak for Muhammed.

Originally posted by chinking58
What documents do you have describing the interactions of shamans and their shamees from 15,000 years ago in such detail? I'm impressed!

Seriously SH, I believe that people are people and always have been (since about 6000 years ago, by the way). As soon as there were questions about God, there were people who took advantage of the demand and came u ...[text shortened]... s laws are simply practical guides for the healthy life of mankind. I won' speak for Muhammed.

Thou shalt not kill: I think that is more correct. But that leaves out
such details as the inquisition, the crusades, the conquistadores, etc.
Why do you use 6000 years as your defining time? It was found
that men were making flutes 40,000 years ago and shoes were found
that were 26,000 years old. Why the emphasis on 6000 years?
for instance the famous Watchtower in Israel has been dated to
9000 years and there was great civilizations in the indus valley by that
time. The sphinx seems to date back at least 8000 years BTW
and the 7 day creation myth may be older than that, just that the
cartuche I saw was dated about 4000 years back.
I just looked at my indent and found it didn't! So I guess you have to
double space to get new paragraphs.

Is this how it works?
There, I am indenting! The Shaman tradition has a world wide
following now and people who study this find similar beliefs in Peru
and Siberia, about as far apart geographically as you can get.
That makes it more real to me than any new so-called religion like
christianity, Islam, etc. New meaning in the last 2000 years or so.
Just because they are new doesn't give them more validity, if anything
it gives them less. I don't think anyone should tell anyone else how
to find spirituality, I think any spirituality is inside each one of us to
discover on his/her own without prodding by some interloper who claims
to be between the searcher and god. (if indeed there is such a thing as
God)

Originally posted by chinking58
If we keep in the vein that persists among those who deride 'religion' as a bad thing; those who consider it an epithet; then in order to say that we do not believe what we are involved in, is like that 'bad thing', then we must assume the word has been modified in the common use, and try to define what we do without that word.

If we go back to the ...[text shortened]... s I think are the true and correct ones. (Only a fool thinks they can all be fully compatible.)

I see no evidence that the definition of the word has been changed by 'common use' in a significant way. Most opposition to religion strikes at the heart of the definition and comes from those who do not believe in a god, do not practice a faith, etc.

You are correctly described as religious (whether you're willing to accept it or not) due to your faith in God. If you truly believe a faith, you should do so without regard to what the polls say.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
To seek God with your whole heart means with all you have, all your energy, it does not mean looking within your own heart.🙂

if you going to search with all you have and all your energy you have to look within yourself - this means your mind and heart and emotions and every fibre of your being - only each one of us knows what goes on inside our thoughts and if we can look within ourselves and really search deep in past the darkest places that we know is in there and with positive thoughts of accepting what we really are within - bad or good - only then can we start the road of searching Gods grace and guidence - it is of no use to go to a church - praise - talk and debate and quote if within you, you do not believe all you say and do not live by example and to do this you need to search yourself, i can talk and words can flow out of my mouth but one should ask yourself do i actually listern to myself and believe all iam saying, do i actually go out there looking and seeing or is it a programme iam expected to follow. now if you search yourself within there God talks to you - why? because everyone is different and God knows that once you reach that point of seeing what really goes on in the core of you he can begin his work. sorry all this is only what i think - many will disagree, but is that not why we different - how is it possible to go out there into this world and try to fix others or follow others because of heresay if we cannot search within ourselves for truths of what we really about - the place to improve is first within one's own heart and head and hands and then God takes over as long as you willing to allow him. hopfully someone knows what iam trying to say here ...........🙄

Originally posted by Palynka
I have no beef with theists like you, then.

I think that searching for alternative God implies also searching in other forms of viewing Him. Which may include not believing, as well.

If more people did the same and tried to search without being prejudiced by the society where they live, the world would be a much more tolerant place in terms of religion.

why do you call me a theist???

Originally posted by FORESTNYMPH
why do you call me a theist???

Why not?

Originally posted by FORESTNYMPH
i now believe there is a God out there

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.

when you find the way, the way will find you.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
I see no evidence that the definition of the word has been changed by 'common use' in a significant way. Most opposition to religion strikes at the heart of the definition and comes from those who do not believe in a god, do not practice a faith, etc.

You are correctly described as religious (whether you're willing to accept it or not) due to yo ...[text shortened]... ith in God. If you truly believe a faith, you should do so without regard to what the polls say.

I see no evidence that the definition of the word has been changed by 'common use' in a significant way. Most opposition to religion strikes at the heart of the definition and comes from those who do not believe in a god, do not practice a faith, etc.

I think that right here you are rightly suggesting that those who don't believe in a god oppose religion. (why is that? sounds like a commision of the worst sin ever: intolerance) In this rising tide of intolerance for all things religious, religion has indeed come to be seen, not neutrally at the best, but negatively.

The public media portrays all priests, pastors and nuns as somehow warped and ignorant people who went into religion because of some kind of weakness of character. Churches of all sorts perpetrate foolishness regularly and these stories are emphasized on the news, along with scandals involving molestation by priests. The cause of Islam is not well advanced by the radical cause of Al Quaeda. The cause of Christ is not helped by sex scandals like Jimmy Swaggart's.

All of these examples have detracted from the value and respect that the public previously held for most things religious. So you can see why I would rather not be lumped in the same lump. Therefore I don't think it's wrong of me to try to qualify the term so that I can at least be found in the positive connotation. Yes I believe in God, and love Him, and worship Him, but no, I don't take advantage of others or promote a personal agenda under His flag.

You are correctly described as religious (whether you're willing to accept it or not) due to your faith in God. If you truly believe a faith, you should do so without regard to what the polls say.

Indeed I do believe in Jesus Christ as the redeemer of mankind, and I have accepted Him as my savior! It is in regard to the discredit done to Him by so many 'religious' practitioners that I would like to see the body of true beleivers removed from under the group title, religious.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Thou shalt not kill: I think that is more correct. But that leaves out
such details as the inquisition, the crusades, the conquistadores, etc.
Why do you use 6000 years as your defining time? It was found
that men were making flutes 40,000 years ago and shoes were found
that were 26,000 years old. Why the emphasis on 6000 years?
for instance the famous ...[text shortened]... rloper who claims
to be between the searcher and god. (if indeed there is such a thing as
God)

Actually the commandment is properly translated as "Do not murder".
Killing in war and in capital crimes was obviously allowed and even called for by God in other delineations of His law.

The Church readily admits that the inquisition, crusades etc. were all done wrongfully, by sinners who were not representing God in actuality, but only by boldly claiming to be doing so.

The rough figure of 6000 years comes from studying the geneologies given in the Bible. There is more reason to trust the history given in this document than there is to trust the conclusions derived about your examples. None of those figures can be known absolutely, and they are all just guesstimates. I wish they would qualify their dates with simple words like 'may be' or 'could be' or 'probably'. There is no dating method that can accurately define when old shoes were made!

I don't think anyone should tell anyone else how
to find spirituality, I think any spirituality is inside each one of us to
discover on his/her own without prodding by some interloper who claims
to be between the searcher and god. (if indeed there is such a thing as
God)

Have you really thought about what this means? If there is 'spirituality inside each one of us to discover', what does that mean?
I know as babies we each eventually discover our tongues, and our hands. (I have a picture of my daughter at that moment! You can see the wonder in her eyes as she realized that that five fingered thing floating out there was part of her!) But that is something absolute and common to all people. If you are saying that there is one God and that sooner or later we all come to the point of seeking Him; that as our consciousness grows and as our consciences speak to us, we begin to 'know' He is there; that as we recognize that we habitually break a 'law written on our hearts' we feel the need to be forgiven by a higher spiritual lawgiver; then I agree with you wholeheartedly.

But you seem to be saying that we all can find a new and totally different 'spirituality' within ourselves; one that is personally adjusted to our unique frame; one that may have attributes contradicting the spirituality of others, but so what. It doesn't make sense to me that any one person can find a truth that is not true for everyone else and always. And if the truth we each find is the same truth, then that is evidence of A TRUTH (or God).

What you call an interloper, I call a helper. My Pastor helps me and my fellow churchgoers to understand what has been sorted out by others before us. When you went to school and sat under qualified teachers you didn't complain that they were interlopers did you? Instead, you gladly took advantage of the experience and knowledge gained by so many others before you..

there is a lot of posts and long some very long, I will simply say follow your heart read the bible for yourself, and pray that the lord sends the spirit to guide you, no religion is true not many are false (christian).

Originally posted by checkbaiter
I think religion is a poor choice. I define religion as a "manmade" form of worship. Just seek God with your whole heart! Pray and ask ..

I 100% agree with CheckBaiter.

Religion doesnt matter.

Bye from Tim 🙂

Originally posted by Phledos
I 100% agree with CheckBaiter.

Religion doesnt matter.

Bye from Tim 🙂

Bye from Tim

Why you always running off after one comment?