[ POLL ] Which "Christian" religion ... ?

Post Reply New Topic

I might have believed in a "literal" interpretation of the Bible during the time the Bible was compiled....but it's impossible to believe in it literally in a 21st century context.

He was born Lij Tafari Makonnen and I think Ras meant king or ruler or something.

It happens all the time and in every religion.  Even within the same congregations, people cannot agree on which parts of Scripture are literal, and which parts are metaphorical -- which parts are G^D's own Word, and which parts are mere parable.  This is also one of the reasons why there is no one singular religion, or one singular Scripture.  Each individual prophet and worshiper has his or her own interpretation of what G^D allegedly said.

To clarify: in my opinion, religion stifles science; but this is tangential to the purpose and scope of this thread.

Spiritual beliefs often don't hinder scientific exploration but enforcing literal interpretation of the Bible as national religion would be disastrous in this aspect.

I can go along with that.

Does your statement include just the Old Testament or the New Testament too? I am just asking because I know you are Jewish by birth. So, even if you say New Testament is only valid for that particular time period, its still amazing you attach any validity to it at all.

^^^
Every Word
Is Metaphor
That Continues
To Change ACross
the only 'Time' THAT IS Change;

True; Words Are a Lot Like the
Rest of Nature (God) this Way;

Any Surprise, We Create 'A
Same Metaphor', Indeed, in Short no...

In Longer; There Will Never Be Just

One Definition for a Word

As the Reality is Change;

It Sort of Answers
'the Poll' too For Those
Who Are More 'Influent' With Creation (God) NoW...

i Choose The Christian And All Religions of Change;
There is No Escaping the Nature of (GoD) Change;

Yes,
God is
Literally Change;
But Not Just Coins

With Two Faces...

or even one...

Other
than
Change Now...

There is this Statue of
JeSuS Ascending With His
Arms Reaching into Above
With No Cross at All At The
Catholic Church i Visit; All That's
MiSSinG From The Shell of the Statue
With Arms Reaching High and The Words
of the

Church
is the
Heaven Changing
Colors FLoWeRinG WiTHIN
But it Always Changes BLacK
Abyss through Purgatory Greys
Through Beyond Rainbow Colors
Now; For True God Is a FLoWeR of
Change; Thorns And Roses Same Difference

Of Human
Real Soul
Breathing
or Suffocating
Trying To Breathe Again or
Who Knows for the First Breath
of LoVE And LiGHT Free CoLoRinG NoW More...

PerhapS AGAiN the Christian Religion Will Be
A Right To Life, And Liberty And the Pursuit of

Individual Happiness...

Is That Religion Enough

Is that God Enough...

i For one Believe it Is...

As Long as We Have Enough
Empathy, Sympathy, And Compassion
To Allow the Change of Other Happiness With Least Harm now...

Or Somehow, Did i miss the Essence of The JeSuS Story That Makes United States Sense....

Honestly, Our Forefathers/Mothers Put something More Important than An Idol State of Jesus on
A Cross
in A
'Declaration
of Independence';

Instead, they Put The
Teaching of Loving Freedom in Change (GoD)

Breathing In Words of Declaration of Freedom of Independence THere...

As usual, It is the Story that is King and Queen; not the Story

Teller of Origin,

Indeed...

That's Why i don't
Need a Name to Write...
Or Any Kind of Copy Right;
Nor Does 'God' to Change As Change Eternally Now...

Well, if I *had* to choose one Christian branch, The Quakers seem a fairly nice choice.

- They ordained women even back in the 17th century. Elizabeth Hooton (died in 1672) may have been the first female pastor in Christianity. By comparison, The first Lutheran female Pastor was ordained in 1970, and the first catholic female pastor will be ordained in 9170.
- They refuse to swear oaths because of their principled dedication to telling the truth at all times (Matthew 5:30-37). This is why the US constitution has 3 "Oath or Affirmation" clauses.
- They have cool hats.

They make pretty good oatmeal, too!

That reminds me of something interesting. I watched a youtube video by a Jew -- who himself doesn't believe in Jesus -- but who was trying to find common ground with Christians anyway. So he was saying that Pharesees didn't kill Jesus -- the Sadducees did. Even though Pharesees were opponents of Jesus (as evident from various New Testament passages) they were not plotting His actual murder.

I am not saying I agree with him, but if what he says is true then it really puts a different perspective into things. In this case, the consequence of Jewish prosecution of Jesus is *not* the 2000 years of exile (as commonly believed) but instead it is the fact that Sadducees are no longer around (which seems rather benigh and irrelevant to all concerned).

The Jews did not kill Jesus; the Romans did.  Specifically, the Roman soldiers under the direct order and supervision of a Roman Centurion -- likely the same one who pronounced Jesus as the Son of G^D after Jesus' death.

The Jews never asked for anyone to be killed,The Romans just requested a Jewish prisoner to be released and the Jews didn't choose Jesus as the prisoner.Had they chosen Jesus for release someone else would have been the New Testament Christos or Messiah.

Well, "was it Jews or was it Romans" is an old and tired debate. But "hey, its not Pharesees its Sadducees" is a totally new idea on the table.

By the way, here is another new idea. Romans are Italian, so if it was Romans, it means we are to hate Italians. But then it doesn't really vindicate the Jews: it would be more like Jews are Italians are both bad lets see who are worse. But that would bring an interesting twist to the story. On the one hand, Jews and Italians will be opponents in their competition "who is less guilty" yet on the other hand Jews and Italians will become good friends as they would both be facing the same persecution for the same thing.



But keep in mind that Pontius Pilate didn't want to kill Jesus but he gave in on the pressure from the crowds.

But then -- like that rabbi said -- if those crowds were composed of Sadducees rather than Pharesees, then this would be irrelevant since Sadducees no longer exist.

And the other point that nobody brought up is that the reason Pilate didn't want to kill Jesus is because of the dream his whife had. So maybe Pilate hated Jesus too, if not for that dream. We would never know.

I voted none, the Church being heavily involved in state issues was disastrous in the past (yes, I'm aware not all the influence was bad and people still use other means, but religion can be a very powerful tool.)

If I were to pick a religion based on headgear, I'd go with the Pastafarians



Not quite as classy as the Quakers, I know

No, Italians are descended from Romans ... and Etruscans ... and Greeks ... and Sicilians ... and just about everyone else around the Mediterranean Sea.  There were no Italians during the Roman Empire.