Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A religion has to be right for everyone or else it isn't right religion.
Why would a religion that is right for you but definitely not right for everyone?
This has to be one of the most ignorant comments I have seen with respect to religion. What is right for one person is not necessarily right for someone else. Just because they do not agree does not make them invalid.
I have always clung to the belief that there are many paths to God, Christianity is merely one of them. To believe otherwise discounts the billions in this world who believe different from me, many of whom do so because of their upbringing, where they live etc.
This has to be one of the most ignorant comments I have seen with respect to religion. What is right for one person is not necessarily right for someone else. Just because they do not agree does not make them invalid.
I have always clung to the belief that there are many paths to God, Christianity is merely one of them. To believe otherwise discounts the billions in this world who believe different from me, many of whom do so because of their upbringing, where they live etc.
Yes, I agree. And clearly the poster of the comment didn't think about what he was writing. Christianity isn't "right" to everyone...like more than half the world. So therefore, I guess he believes that Christianity is not "right". Nice that he could admit that.
If your average Christian could just agree to your second paragraph, I'd respect them much more than I do currently. Instead it's more like a tantrum if I don't believe in their personal version of religion.
What is right for one person is not necessarily right for someone else. Just because they do not agree does not make them invalid.
.
This is somewhat true in a sense when we are free to make a choice; however, if we look at a pragmatic approach, then perhaps there ARE things are not right for all of us ... for example, putting one's hand in fire. Who would think it's good for them to put their hand in a burning fire?
And if we take the same logic on a broader level, then perhaps no one wants to be sent to hell and burn in fire. And perhaps all of us want to go Paradise (provided that hell and heaven exist)? Isn't this somewhat true?
So if we ALL want to avoid hell and if we ALL want to go heaven, then there should ideally be ONE religion for all because if there is ONE GOD, then there is ONE heaven and there is ONE hell. So automatically there has to be one religion for all.
Now, for example, if Hindus believes that there are 35 million gods, then perhaps they have a choice to pick n chose between which of the 35 million hells they want to avoid, and which of the 35 million heavens they want to go to.
Yes, I agree. And clearly the poster of the comment didn't think about what he was writing. Christianity isn't "right" to everyone...like more than half the world.
Think about it ..... if Christians start to believe that Christianity is not right for everyone, then it means that the Christian God purposely created half of the world's population to go hell.
Ideally, Christians should believe that their faith is right for EVERYONE because a loving God would not create his children to be purposely thrown into hell for no reason. No?
Also, if Christians start to believe that Christianity is NOT right for everyone then they should not send out missionaries all around the world because they should know that half of the world will go to hell even if it converts to Christianity and try it's best to believe that Jesus is their savior - because Christian God purposely created half of the man kind to go hell.
Think about it ..... if Christians start to believe that Christianity is not right for everyone, then it means that the Christian God purposely created half of the world's population to go hell.
Ideally, Christians should believe that their faith is right for EVERYONE because a loving God would not create his children to be purposely thrown into hell for no reason. No?
Also, if Christians start to believe that Christianity is NOT right for everyone then they should not send out missionaries all around the world because they should know that half of the world will go to hell even if it converts to Christianity and try it's best to believe that Jesus is their savior - because Christian God purposely created half of the man kind to go hell.
Since you asked, NO. Your logic is faulty. In fact it is not logic, it is just an exercise to justify your world view. The logic put simply -- believe in my God or go to hell. Period.
Since you asked, NO. Your logic is faulty. In fact it is not logic, it is just an exercise to justify your world view. The logic put simply -- believe in my God or go to hell. Period.
That's your opinion without any supporting reasons or logical explanation.
I still believe that Christians should believe that their religion is for EVERYONE and ANYONE who wants to be saved and make it to heaven, no?
What makes ANYTHING moral or immoral? What's the deciding factor? How is that determined?
We've had this convo a whole bunch of times.
Morality is an emergent property of societal interactions and negotiations (explicit and implicit). It is formalized into laws sometimes, into cultural conventions and taboos other times. This is not 100% objective, and can change as society gains collective experience with the causes of various harms and benefits.
In your world morality is divine commands conveyed by a combination of scripture and the convicting work of the Holy Spirit, filtered through individual interpretation. This is not even 0% objective, and despite claims to the contrary, can and does change. I have given specific examples. Things that we used to do in society (slavery, indentured servitude, Jim Crow, child labor) and which we no longer do and attempts to do would result in a pearl-clutching seizure; things we once didn't do and once spoke out against (skirts shorter than ankle length, listening to the radio, unchaperoned dating) and now do without giving it a second thought.
Your implication is that your moral code is objective, unambiguous and immutable. I see no basis to see it as any of those things. It is simply the same societal morality we all abide by, in the interest of civil society, with a few bells and whistles and claims to divine authority.
And as I've also said before countless times, your morality cannot diverge much in any substantive way from societal morality or society would sanction it as immoral. So your morality changes, loosely, to track societal morality anyway. See the examples cited above.
Morality is an emergent property of societal interactions and negotiations (explicit and implicit). It is formalized into laws sometimes, into cultural conventions and taboos other times. This is not 100% objective, and can change as society gains collective experience with the causes of various harms and benefits.
In your world morality is divine commands conveyed by a combination of scripture and the convicting work of the Holy Spirit, filtered through individual interpretation. This is not even 0% objective, and despite claims to the contrary, can and does change. I have given specific examples. Things that we used to do in society (slavery, indentured servitude, Jim Crow, child labor) and which we no longer do and attempts to do would result in a pearl-clutching seizure; things we once didn't do and once spoke out against (skirts shorter than ankle length, listening to the radio, unchaperoned dating) and now do without giving it a second thought.
Your implication is that your moral code is objective, unambiguous and immutable. I see no basis to see it as any of those things. It is simply the same societal morality we all abide by, in the interest of civil society, with a few bells and whistles and claims to divine authority.
And as I've also said before countless times, your morality cannot diverge much in any substantive way from societal morality or society would sanction it is immoral. So your morality changes, loosely, to track societal morality anyway. See the examples cited above.
Exactly. Yes, BF and others of his ilk have had this s'plained to them many times before.
But alas! Because it's a Truth, it slides right off his Fundashield Of Determined Ignorance.
If ignorance is bliss, you'd never be able to wipe the grin off a fundie's face.
That's your opinion without any supporting reasons or logical explanation.
I still believe that Christians should believe that their religion is for EVERYONE and ANYONE who wants to be saved and make it to heaven, no?
I have no problem with that EXCEPT that you don't wait for people to come to you voluntarily. You don't wait for people to seek out your religion. You force yourselves on them, threaten them, cajole them, nag them, and try to get money out of them. Let your message be known in a general way, and if they want to learn more, they're smart enough to walk into a church.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
