Do all religions lead to God?

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Rev Jazzman
Being that the most dangerous kind of mind is a closed one (which I agree with completely because no single religion is completely right IMHO)...

Points to ponder:
1. The Cruisades were caused by the Catholic church's greed for power (which it was beginning to lose at the time).

---

I agree.

Quote:

---

2. The Inquisition was caused by the Catholic Church's greed for power (which it was seriously loosing at the time).

---

I disagree. If you want power, you don't come to a far off land, and slaughter thousands of people and take their land. You make slaves of those people to get power over them. Think of the Inquisition's forays into South America, and tell me if you still honestly believe that they were seeking power, not resources (land, money, gold, etc).

Quote:

---

3. As for the Holocoust... I'm sure it's going to be because of someone's greed for power (aren't most wars?)

---

Well, it was basically because one man decided he didn't like the Jews, and that they were wrong, and he was going to show them. Whether that was the intention or not, I am unsure, but the visible effect in history is that was what the Nazis were trying to do. Either way, it seems to me to be built upon the basis that the Jews were wrong in their religious beliefs, and they were to be punished for it. Again, boorish arrogance on the part of the people with power.

Quote:

---

4. The focus of Christianity(as it was berthed): To have a relationship with a living God through Jesus Christ.

---

Now think about this for a moment. If Jesus is credited with starting Christianity, and stated many times over that people should be worshipping god, not him, wouldn't it follow that he was trying to get people to simply have a relationship with God?

Quote:

---

5. The focus of Judiasm(as it was berthed): To have (or continue in) a covenant with God.
6. The focus of Islam(as it was berthed): To be found in favor with God.

---

All three of these things are merely a different way of saying the same thing: be with God.

Quote:

---

No religion calls for warfare with another religion (and yes, that includes Islam, so Thilly Thadam was way off track on that one). The Catholic Church definately screwed up on that as well (greed does that to people if they let it).

---

I disagree with that, not on the basis of wording, but on the basis that while no major religion calls for outright warfare with another religion, the religions do teach and preach discrimination of others (the damned). If you compare Christian, Jewish, and Islamic {pr|t}eachings to those of say, Buddhists, there's a very startling contrast.

Quote:

---

The Jews just stayed ticked off because they kept getting slaughtered, enslaved, and then finally their boarders were recognized by the UN (which is probably the best thing that's happened for them to date).

---

And potentally the worst thin that's happened for them.

Quote:

---

All three religions have to do with one true God... It only makes sense that they all lead to the same one, right?

So in a sense you're right... It's just a matter of what one believes. What I believe I know is right for me. Of course I can only say that for me because I have no right to judge (that's against my religion). :)

---

That is, in essence, the point. If what you believe works for you, and feels 'right' to you, then that is the answer for you.

Perhaps many Christians believe that Christianity is "right" because of the bible verse (Deuteronomy 12: 2-3):

"Ye shall surely destroy all the places, wherein the nations that ye are to dispossess served their gods, upon the high mountains, and upon the hills, and under every leafy tree. And ye shall break down their altars, and dash in pieces their pillars, and burn their Asherim with fire; and ye shall hew down the graven images of their gods; and ye shall destroy their name out of that place."

Which, in essence give divine "permission" to destroy all evidence of other religions. Which gave motivation to the band of Christians that burned the library at Alexandria in Egypt that contained records of religious beliefs and practices. One can only wonder about the information that was lost...

Then again, many Christians have little understanding of the parables contained in the bible, and therefore accept the dogmas and interpretations blindly without any question.

two words.....
Old Testament.
Jesus Came and said that all men are created equal, that all men could be forgiven. Jesus was the perfect sacrifice. God was an angry, wrathfull God in the old Testament. With Jesus, he showed us his undying compassion and love. So your statement about Christianity was wrong.
Education you see is the key to this Specter.

I agree with all except with one point... Actually two points...

Power is achieved in many ways... Though money, assets, fame, etc... If you go to a far away land and slaughter for gold, land, and money (and achieve that goal), you have gained power. Unfortunately, it was all done in the name of "God." It kind of makes you wonder who their god was.

As far as the holocoust, I wasn't going to assume he meant any specific one, so I chose the "Great Holocoust" that will supposedly come... As far as the Nazi/Jew Holocoust, it wasn't just hate for the Jewish people. Hitler was another one of those wierdo "Christians" who hated the Jews for a variety of reasons. (Two being that, they didn't believe Jesus to be the Son of God, and he saw them as a threat because he knew (as both Christians and Jews would) that the Jews would be a protected nation (by God) until the "end" and for world dominance (greed), that would present a serious problem for Hitler).

My second disagreement is about the relationship with God through Jesus Christ. Jesus taught that the ONLY way to the Father was through Him ("I am the way, the truth, and the light. No man cometh unto the father but by me," "I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved...," etc)

Up until Jesus died on the cross, God's covenant was only with the Jews. The Jews were God's chosen people. Jesus didn't just die for the Jews. He died for all. That relationship with God only comes by way of Jesus Christ.

That is a HUGE difference. That difference is between the old covenant (which only included the Jews), and the new covenant (which includes all).

That brings me to Specter6's observation.... You have to understand that the Old testiment centered around God's covenant with the Jews. That's Judiasm and not Christianity. There is a difference there, so bear that in mind. I bet you won't find anything like that in the new covenant. In fact, what you'll find are comments like "Love your enemy", "Judge not", and "Neither do I condemn thee...", etc... It's all over the place. ;)

What you're talking about is Wierd people who are "Christians" gone awry. Fatal errors, so to speak... :)

Rev

Ok - Old Testament/New Testament which one is "right"?

Just the fact that the New Testament is the "kinder, gentler" version, does that make it "right"? Or do your upbringing and personal beliefs make it "right"?

This is one of the biggest problems that I see with religion. You have numerous translations, versions, etc., and everybody has their own. Each person claims there's is more "accurate". even the Gospels conflict with one another!

I want to know how the New Testament is better than the Old Testament. Is it because it reflects "God" as a merciful entity? Don't they refer to the same "God"? So how is the "edited" version better?

The Old Testiment enveloped God's covenant with the Jews. The Old Testiment is "right" for Judiasm. The New Testiment envelopes God's covenant with "all who believe." That is "right" for Christianity. Neither is "better." Neither is untrue. (If you haven't noticed yet, I'm one of those "The answer to everything is 'it depends'" people)

The Gospels conflict with one another? Are you sure you want to go there (I AM a preacher, after all!) :) Actually, if you want to do that, then let's do it PM. That's really not what this thread is supposed to be about... (we're already getting off subject)

Another thing to take note of is the fact that the Holy Bible is a "Christian" book but still contains the Old testiment. This is because there is very little to be understood about the New Covenant unless there is at least a general understanding of the Old. It's like two completely different worlds, but they're inseperable.

As far as versions, I'm assuming you're talking about the different translations... The ancient Hebrew and Greek languages are not exactly easy to translate. I have a Hebrew and Greek index that I refer to all the time because translations do get messed up along the way. That's just a part of life (Not that I'm complaining, because research never hurt anyone). Another factor is that there are translations that supposedly "expound" whereas it's more interjectory than exposition.

Actually, the Old Testament provides the basis for the New Testament. It tells the story of humankind's inability to live up to God's standards. The New Testament continues the story by telling how God sent the solution for our sin, his Son Jesus Christ, to die and take the penalty for our sins. God did not "change" and somehow become more loving and merciful in the New Testament. God's love and mercy and forgiveness are well illustrated in the Old Testament , just as God's judgement and discipline are present in the New Testament. God is not schizophrenic. Judgment and love are not necessarily mutually exclusive. God is balanced. I'll write more later.

BTW, good to see another preacher, welcome Rev. Jazzman! :)

Balanced between what? Why does the creator of everything need balance?


I've never thought of God as the catholics do, you know, "You'll burn in Hell for jerking off!" I've always viewed him as sort of like Hugh Beaumont, you know, "Aww, you screwed up come over here and give me hug, and don't screw up again."

As far as the whole translation thing goes. There are far too many words thet just aren't transl;atable. Simple fact of the matter is there are some words that have no direct or even indirect translation, so everything you read in today's bible is (how shall I say this without pissing everybody off), inherintly flawed...

King James was a perfect example of how translation can be twisted to suit misogyinstic, racist, blah, idiots.

Balanced between what? Why does the creator of everything need balance?


I've never thought of God as the catholics do, you know, "You'll burn in Hell for jerking off!" I've always viewed him as sort of like Hugh Beaumont, you know, "Aww, you screwed up come over here and give me hug, and don't screw up again."

As far as the whole translation thing goes. There are far too many words thet just aren't transl;atable. Simple fact of the matter is there are some words that have no direct or even indirect translation, so everything you read in today's bible is (how shall I say this without pissing everybody off), inherintly flawed...

King James was a perfect example of how translation can be twisted to suit misogyinstic, racist, blah, idiots.

Quote:

---

King James was a perfect example of how translation can be twisted to suit misogyinstic, racist, blah, idiots.

---

Have to agree. The King James "version" (not translation), is a rather perfect example of how religious texts can be manipulated, but yet accepted.

Now how is this possible, if there is one "right"?