Religion is Evil!

I believe that most, if not all conflict in History can be traced to a spiritual conflict. The Holy Spirit in this corner. And over there, _____________. God is not always on the side of America, either!Of course, I believe in One way to God, so it follows that I define the conflict thusly. Kinda like money, eh Dan? Money is not the root of all evil. The Love of Money is the root of all evil. Right? I agree. Jesus hung out with partiers and not Pharisees. I agree, Mike. Be it a Bible or a Boeing 767, we hope that whoever holds it knows how to use it. Reminds me of the joke that I heard: Jesus Saves. Moses Invests. [This message has been edited by Phatboy, 02-17-2004][This message has been edited by Phatboy, 02-17-2004]

I believe that the scenario went like this. You say that they were I say that before they ate the fruit, they had no need of an individual comprehension because they merely needed to obey God and allow Him to be their comprehension. Once they fell for the sales line of "Ye shall be as gods" then they ate the fruit and BOOM! They had comprehension. It was at THAT point that they took "Lets Make A Deal" to a whole new level. No longer was it door#1,2,or3. In essence, the view of reality became an infinite number of doors! Before the moment of the Fall, they were naked and unashamed. Why? Because they were covered. God covered them. God was their comprehension. God was their communion! They were unafraid. After the Fall, they were on their own.[This message has been edited by Phatboy, 02-19-2004]

I think that I get what you are saying. And God knew what was going to happen. For us to judge God as careless and unjust presupposes that we know some principle that is higher than Gods purpose. I say that we do not. We believe that God is just and good. Even if He was not, there is not much we can do about it. On a hijacked plane, people may fight the authority at the risk of death. Why fight a God who is Omnipotant? What even gave us the desire to do so?

Well, mammuthus I must say this: You may be intellectually arrogant, but you are NOT self righteously arrogant! Can we talk?

Arrogance takes many forms. In observing some fundamentalists, one is struck by their presupposition that the world is exactly how they see it. Bolstered by faith in God, they tend
to hide their ignorance behind other peoples websites and behind the Bible itself. They have placed their entire identity on a source of wisdom. In their defense, they believe the wisdom to be beyond human wisdom. Intellectuals can be self righteous in that they have studied many different sources of knowledge and wisdom. Some of them are still humble enough to acknowledge a power greater than themselves yet for many of them, the only thing greater than themselves is the collective wisdom and reason of humanity. They can not or will not conceive of a God that is mightier than this. Seeking to objectify God apart from Jesus Christ, they construct a God in their minds who surely must be unfair. Smiting people, wiping out entire nations, refusing to cure Typus or prevent widespread human suffering: What kind of God is this? It is one whom they have defined. For a true believer, however, God has been encountered. This encounter is more than a chance vision or experience. This encounter is ongoing. The relationship cannot be denied or wished away. To do so would be to deny reality itself. From a believers perspective, I'm Phatboy...signing out.

I always hated the klingons, and they don't exist!

Who is this God of Love, Crashfrog? Does He exist or is the love the love in each of our hearts? What do we care deeply about, Crashfrog? Is it someone who exists, like Chris? Just a thought or two to ponder.

My point was that Religion becomes more than a dogmatic concept when it becomes personal. Chris is a personality with a story to tell and a faith to share. Shared faith is more than a Cuckoos Nest encounter group where one mans giant turtle is another mans Jesus who Rose from the Dead. Shared Faith is the very essence and cutting edge of humanity on a quest for meaning. Religion is only Evil if it is misused.

Based on this statement, I see that you are a believer of some sort. Since you disagree with my assessment of collective human wisdom being the highest pinnacle,(for you) what is it that you believe in? So now we are back to defining this supreme being. For me, He is Jesus Christ. God Incarnate. Crashfrog says to Chris: And I am puzzled at what Crashfrog means by "us." If he is referring to "us" as intellectuals, then I ask what type of an intellectual. A believer in a source higher than humanity or not? OK, Crashfrog. You say that God does not exist. Atheists have rejected Christ. Why? Based on judging His validity by their own source. Their source is either collective human wisdom or their own wisdom. My point is proven. To an atheist, human wisdom is the highest pinnacle. Human nature tends to rebel at an authority higher than ourselves. Even for believers. But we are working on it.

If Religion is defined as being mans attempt to find or define God, I assert that religion is evil. If Religion is God imparting Truth into man and seeking relationship with us, I assert that Religion is NOT evil.

A fantasy roleplaying game thought by some fundamentalists to usher in "other" spirits to a persons mind. And since Your "deity" is your own mind, you are not evil! Is that how you see it, crashfrog? Fine. I respect the religion that you have chosen. After all, if all truth is relative, who am I or my God to tell you any different? If My God is Not relative as a truth, but is absolute, you then have an issue with Him. Whew! This topic is getting old!

Because the OT was a different dispensation towards humanity and does not apply to us today. The OT from The Law on was written to the Jewish people. Before the Law was given, the OT was written for the Pagan people with no religion. The NT from Mid Acts until the Rapture is written for us today. Like I said, it was written for the Jews in those days. No, I do not deny this,but there is a question of whether one is labled "Christian" based on culture and practice versus one who is a true Christian by impartation of the Holy Spirit. The latter type of Christian would not have killed. [This message has been edited by Phatboy, 02-24-2004][This message has been edited by Phatboy, 02-24-2004]

And I am telling you that a Christian does not become a Christian merely by being born to religious parents. A Christian does not necessarily become a christian through rituals such as water baptism. A TRUE Christian, of which perhaps 3 out of ten are, is a Christian due to impartation of the Holy Spirit. While not perfect, these sort of people do not knowingly sin in such a way as you describe. I realize that you do not understand or perhaps even accept the fact that a spiritual impartation is possible. As long as you see our belief as originating in our own minds, it cannot be explained to you. No. Most certainly not agnostic or atheist intellectuals who profess themselves wise in the study of the past, either. I would say that Biblical scholars who themselves recognize the living Spirit of God would be the true judges of scriptural interpretation. One who is accountable to a seperate intellectual source cannot logically say which scripture is inerrent and what it applies to. Only a Believer can do that. Darn right! I would assume that you would not think me qualified to interpret the disciplines which YOU study. Why then could you even assume that you are qualified to interpret mine? Yes...much occult and nature religion was present before the gving of the Law to the Jews. Nimrod was a good example of a Pagan minded leader with occult worship. Much of this occult worship was adapted by the Catholic Church to bring in pagan believers. In this sense, the church was fallible and imperfect. There was a remnant>>a small number of monks and other true believers who kept the Absolute Truth of the Christian message alive! You must remember that the ones with True Spiritual impartation were not doing the killing and the self righteous power struggle that the political church was doing.

If a group of people are standing around admiring a painting, each person can and does have an opinion of the meaning of the painting according to the artist, according to their own interpretation, and according to the style and the time that the painting was made. No one opinion is any more valid or true than any other opinion. The only individual who by right should have a higher opinion than the sum of the human opinion about the painting is the artist. To us as Christian believers, we have met the artist. The architect of the world that we live in. The master designer of the universe. He created the very definition of logic, order, love and law. He stands alone as our Messiah--our Savior--our God. No, mammuthus. I am not talking about a book. I am talking about the subject of the book.
I am talking about the personality and the character behind the book. The word was not created by human authors 80 years after the fact. The word was the word before humanity even entered the picture. The word was the word in the beginning. The Spirit behind, within, and throughout the word is not an imperfect fallible human one. The Spirit is from a higher source than mere human wisdom. Whether or not you choose to accept and believe in Him, He does exist. You may not understand Him. He understands you. You may not dare to believe because of the imperfections of humanity and a corrupt church. He has transcended that imperfection. You need not be convinced. I am not convinced that any of you are certain. I respect your intelligence on matters pertaining to science. I am no creationist in the literal sense, except as to the fact that He was in the beginning, He is now, and He always shall be! Try convincing Him that you made Him up!

I think that it is inappropriate to refer to the trinity as "gods". The Tri-unity of God is a monotheistic concept, Stephen. At least in my belief.