different faiths all lead to god?

Post Reply New Topic

Bazz: taken literally, that may mean that Jesus is telling people to kill because they would be killed themselves (like what you are saying about muslims). Also, the old testament is where you find the 'eye for an eye' analogy. Yes, depending on how it is read, and what you are taught, it is quite brutal.

Thank the gods my beliefs aren't likely to get me into trouble like that (unless another inquisition comes along, then I'm screwed).

you look at the solution wrong.


you're saying that the end result is the road. but the road is just the means of getting around. the end is the result...someone who is more humble, more forgiving, more submissive....that's what's at the end. god is just a means.

Correct, you just didn't get the right word emphisized. Let's stand in his sandles for a minute and say it. I am the way. If you have a hard time standing in his sandles, look through your readings with that in mind, he says it's an ok thing to do. It's the worst kept secret in the world. It's just too simple to see and it's everywhere. Now that my friend is a wonderful feeling. Almost makes you want to be reborn everyday, but see, you can. He wasn't the first to see it, nor the last. He sure wouldn't mind if someone had said it first and they had and he did ask you to repeat it, did he not? label? naw get you in trouble, starts wars and stuff, he never called it christianity now did he. Give the guy some damn credit, but don't give em credit he didn't ask for. yup sharp guy, one of my heroes.

That's fine for all those who follow the Christian faith; but what about the billions that don't? The muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Taoists, Pagans (including Wiccans and Druids), pantheists, and even atheists as well? They believe differently, and therefore don't believe that Jesus was their saviour and their only path to the hereafter. Christians can believe what they want, but they shouldn't try to convert everyone and say that no-believers will perish.

Not sure if that was directed at me. But... Jesus is just one of the many paths, up to you to choose the one that fits. What you see when you travel yours is up to you. But this path I speak of, knows no religon. It's even open for aithiests I don't preach it, couldn't if I wanted to.

Christians have a mandate from our founder to share our faith. And have a right to free speech. If you don't like it, that's fine. But saying it's tantamount to a "crusade" is just paranoia.

Certainly there's violence in the old testament. But it was never a blanket violence, but meant for specific purposes and at specific peoples. As far as stoning, which was the traditional capital punishment... Jesus more or less put an end to that. The only stonings and violence in the new testament were against Christians, by the Jews and Romans. Christians in the New Testament never instigated violence, and Jesus never advocated it.

"Jesus answered, 'I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me' " (John 14:6).

Was Jesus fibbin'?

Also, He said: "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it" (Matt 7:13-14).

So, if He's a liar, then He can't be one of the paths to the afterlife. But if he was a moral man, and not a liar, then He is the only way to God and the afterlife.

Last edited by Ragtime on 21 Aug 2007, 10:37 pm, edited 3 times in total.

...or this whoe story is a work of fiction writen 40 years after the death of some rabble rousing carpenter from Judea.

"Then he (Jesus) called the crowd to him along with his disciples and said: 'If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it'" (Mark 8:34-35).

Jesus said be ready to die for the faith, and specifically said not to kill for it.

So, the Crusaders and Inquisition got it "back-assward".

Ragtime: you keep missing the point; your posts about what is said in the scriptures ONLY applies to those that believe along those lines; others such as myself (pagan), and the muslims etc shouldn't be coerced into believing that too, if we don't choose. By continually preaching your way, you are saying all of us are wrong. Don't deny it, it's there in black and white.

Not true. Every document can be judged on its own logic, regardless of whether it is known to be an accurate document. And, since it's quite untrue that every non-Christian rejects the entire historicity of events in the Bible, my argument is well-directed to the majority: those who believe there's a fair amount of truth and accuracy in the Bible. But again, even if it's deemed false from cover-to-cover, its logic can still be evaluated and conclusions drawn therefrom. Besides, I didn't invent my theology; therefore, when referring to it, I naturally and responsibly allude to its source.

Last edited by Ragtime on 21 Aug 2007, 10:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

how are you being coerced?

Bazza: the back-handed way they lay a guilt trip on us for not conforming to their viewpoint ('he's damned if he doesn't believe' or 'I'll pray for him to repent' repeated ad nauseum).

Ragtime: Those events like the earthquake and volcanic eruption that caused the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah are well documented, as with the flood that later became the Black Sea (Noah's Ark). The God-spin was later added to make it more sensational. Natural explanations can be found for most if not all of the events, but when you add folklore about mystical beings affecting events being fact, that's where the credibility tends to wane. Another one that can be easily explained is the 'Nile turning to blood'; iron oxide from the digging to form the pyramids similar to the iron oxide found in the Rio Tinto in Spain after the mining operations late last century.

How about the shortly-following deaths of every firstborn Egyptian male, both humans and cattle, in the same night? (Exodus 11) A little selective and coincidental, don't you think?

And how about the fact that the Egyptians let the Israelites -- thousands of FREE SLAVE LABORORS -- simply escape? Israel was a totally-subjugated and resourceless people at the time -- why could not the well-armed and well-fed Egyptian army recapture them, if Israel somehow all fled secretly?