Quote:

---

The church doesn’t tolerate these deceivers...they speak against them, but since it isn’t a military type environment what exactly can they do?  Most protestant churches don’t have a strong hierarchy as there is so much abuse when a hierarchy is established. Thus the “church” remains powerless except to pray and speak out against it.-

Well, which church speaks against which church? Since they are all claiming to be the same church it gets a little confusing even for those who are on the outside, I can't imagine being inside that mess.

-Name it claim it theology is about possessions and materialims, confession (to God in my belief system not a priest) is not necessary in my belief system (and most protestant's belief system) but is helpful.-

Hmm... since more Christians are Catholic than anything else, well; just what are you saying here? ;-)  

-Basically forgiveness is given upon belief.  According to the scriptural world view (in my understanding)...no one can earn salvation cause we are corrupt to a greater or less extent, so the only thing that saves us is our belief in Jesus’ sacrifice for our sins. -

Yes... rather annoying. That is pretty much what it comes down too, and since by our very corruption we are without hope of salvation without belief in the saviour, then how does free will matter? We have it sure, but since it doesn't change anything then predestination doesn't just rule the afterlife, but the forelife also.  

-This doctrine is not suppose to encourage a disregard for a  good life...but instead recognizes...well to use 12 step terminology...our powerlessness in that no matter how hard we try we will still never be perfect.  Thus we need the perfect sacrifice (Jesus).  Confession or more accurately belief in Jesus' perfect sacrifice is not easy...it is very hard for prideful mankind to acknowledge their despair and inability to obtain salvation by their own efforts.  The gift is easy to receive but difficult to accept due to our arrogance (mine included).-

One thing I still don't get is what exactly Jesus sacrifice was worth. I mean- supposedly he died and saved us all? Since he didn't really die- I just have never understood what the point was, he still exists, just in a different form, that isn't a great sacrifice. So he endured a little pain, what mother doesn't? Or anything alive really. Aside from mankind's striving for salvation, which point raises the idea we are seeking anyone's benediction merely to continue existing, if we must exist on something else's sufference than we aren't really free.

-The message of the Bible cannot ever be proven 100% by reason alone…so thus faith is essential.  But the Creator also gave us a mind and intelligence and expects us to use it to discern the meaning of the Bible and how to apply it in our day to day life.-

I suppose then this means that the creator encourages all these different intepretations of the bible? Does this mean misquotes are tolerated, or that there are no misquotes, just an emphasis on different parts of the message?

-Well the why, in my understanding, is due to the fact that Christianity is one of the most well known religions and most people who disagree with it are angry that it does teachs “a way” to salvation not “many ways”.  Many people seem to want a religion that fits their lifestyle and does not require any true struggle and change.-

It does seem to teach many ways though- you said it yourself- Protestants aren't inclined to accept the Catholics confessionals, and Orthodox services are even further away from the Protestant churches. Also, your characterization of everyone who disagrees with your point of view, as being "angry" does a vast injustice to inquiring minds and simply the respect due every man which even the bible seems to emphasize most of the time. Why must those who disagree be "angry"? That seems a small step to making them 'enemies' who must be defeated to defend oneself. Spiritual combat is a topic at many revivals and prayer meetings, so it does seem many Chritians see themselves besieged. Yet, who do they worry about most? Not really their fellow man, or even outside pagan religions, but actually preach against other Christians very often.  

-Any system (religious or secular) that sets a standard is going to be abrasive to those that would rather live life on their own terms and desires.  I mean who wants to follow a system that teaches premarital sex is not what was designed for our good....”hey sex is lots of fun and I want to do it when and where I please”...thus Christianity seems intolerant of the lifestyle that most people would like to partake in.-

LOL I think it's funny you have decided that everyone who isn't Christian is a hedonist. People are of all types, be they Christian, Jew, Moslem, Hindu, Bhuddist, etc... Almost all formulic religious systems include within their belief structures certain taboos or guidelines against various types of behaviour, but in the anagolous society where those systems formed, the secular authority almost always has had the same rules. Lately of course with the spread of democracy and the championing of individual freedom over cultural tradition, this has changed. It's hard to predict how long this will last and if religion is outdated, I think religion will adapt just as it has over the previous millenia because many people feel a need for justification of their beliefs. The Christianity of the early years is almost totally different from that of modern times in many ways, yet it still does carry a few of the major focus I will admit, but how many of the original and how many new? That can be debated endlessly if you believe in the sanctity of the bible or the politics of the times and think all the nobleman's 2nd sons who didn't get any land joined the priesthood and mysteriously gave up their previous life and ambitions.

-My point was that life is full of exclusionary thinking in a multitude of environments/systems.  So if that premise is correct, why do people so viciously attack Christianity and not other systems?  It seems very hypocritical when people apply one standard to “secular” exclusionary belief systems and a very harsher standard to Christianity.-

Why do you think people attack Christianity more than other systems? First of all that isn't true, look at the strife in Isreal and Indonesia right now, then also what happened in Bosnia, India, Mexico, and is still happening throughout the world in various places to large defgee, and even in the US to a smaller degree. Secondly, even if it were true that people attacked Christianty more often, it would be because it is the largest target, and the most frequent provacatuer sending missionaries and trying to recruit people.

-Well here I guess I would need a definition of terms...what exactly do you mean by “force”?.  Crusading in my opinion is not “forcing” anything, but a humble plea to those that might be headed toward devastation to turn around.  In a similar vein,  I don’t think those who crusade against drunk driving are trying to force anything but trying to save lives.  Yes we need to lead by example...but does that mean that Christians should be denied their right to freedom of speech to try and encourage others to turn towards a path that would possibly benefit and save others in the end?-

Force; I would say there are few instances of physical force currently, but a few still occur, and historically they occured very frequently. As far as force outside of the point of a sword(or gun) I think the greatest force the Church is using nowdays is economical. If some village in a hinterland somewhere converts, they get a new well, housing, or some other materiel benefit. There is also the force of exucmmication or the severing of ties in areas which are already Christian, but contain many people who wouldn't follow the religion so closely or perhaps abandon it entirely as they see it outmoded. It's strange that the more educated people become, the less often they attend church.

-I agree that it is a difficult thing regarding those who may have never heard of Christ.  According to the Bible (in my understanding) everyone is held accountable for what they have been given.-

So if you have been given nothing you are not held accountable at all? What a system, I wish I was born a Hun or pre- Christian Roman, taking slaves, sacking cities, rape, murder pillage, and still go to heaven?  

-On the other hand Christians were commissioned in the Bible to “spread the Good news”, so to ignore those who may not of heard about Christ would be disobedience.  Additionally, it is a common teaching in the Bible that life is better, not easier, with a faith in Christ.  Therefore teaching Christ to others is not only for their eternal salvation, but to meet their daily needs.-

I can't really disagree with that, but I am just wondering why you seem surprised that some people might greet these ideas which are alien to their culture and lifestyle with some skepticism and outright hostility even, the life of a missionary isn't easy, and if every Christian is a missionary, why, you said it yourself, life is better not easier apparently.

-Well first off...if you look around the world everyone is preaching a message (i.e. “be young, be healthy, be capitalist, be family orientated, drugs sex and rock n roll, be educated, be white, be tolerent, be open minded, be self actualized, be rational, etc.,etc. etc”)  So I disagree with the premise that most of the world is not preaching anything.  Additionally, those who believe that you shouldn’t preach a specific belief system are actually preaching a belief system called relativism.  So in the end EVERYONE is preaching in a one way or another, not just Christains.-

Can you preach tolerance? I'm not sure if that isn't an oxymoron. I think you are right in that every person, state, institution, or group has a view of the world, and if you want to communicate with them you have to understand some of it, but there is a very large difference from knowing your own view of the world and going to trying to get others to see it as you do.  Can you preach that which isn't? Relativism is a rather extreme form of tolerance though and has it's own inadequacies, just because one doesn't believe others shouldn't try to convert other than by example, that doesn't mean everything is nothing compared to anything else which relativism basically doesn't differentiate between anything, mayhem and destruction being as reasonable of actions as anything else.

-Secondly, if you, Ichon, believed in your heart of hearts that there was only one way to save another person from a severe consequence wouldn’t you be the first to speak up?-  

That really depends on how I had to speak up. If there were only seonds to act in, and the person was near enough to hear of course I would warn them, but if they plunged unheeding what can I do? This is a lifetime we are speaking of however- and also remember that Christians aren't saving people, God and the people's belief in one aspect of God which redeems, saves them. So, it's also a matter of forcefully converting people, because if you have agreed that God has a method for saving those who haven't heard of Christ- then those who have heard of him have dismissed or been misinforemd. I would think the safest course and the one which saved the most people would be to cease spreading the 'good news' since then by fate of never having heard of Christ everyone would be saved. If only for that edict which you must obey... but consider, there is nothing saying the method in which you must spread this 'good news' might it not be that living by example is the best way? Demonstrating how live is "better" even though it might not be easier?

-In my opinion, no caring person in the world wants others to go through a torturous experience, so if Christians (correctly or incorrectly) believe they are saving people from eternal damnation why do people fault them?  It would be inhuman for Christians to not try to help others if they truly believed that others were destined towards intense suffering without turning their hearts to Christ.-

Why do people fault them? Do you really ask that question seriously? I'm sure that clerics during the inquisition wondered why so many witches and heretics actually protested the purifying stake and flames. Some thing you can't teach, you have to let people learn, and the best way to let others learn is by example. It's not that difficult to understand that someone will reject something you shove down his throat, but if you leave it sitting on the table and let the armoa drift to them, they will likely decide they want some of it for themselves and put it into their own mouths. That is the difference.

-Just my thoughts  Enjoying the conversation

---

Quote:

---

Read "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" by Douglas Adams - Babelfish section... a proof for the non-existance of God is given there.

---