What do you think about religion?

Sorry, haven't been too much to TB lately...

Marc, to respond to Mel I think you took the words pretty close to out of my mouth. I would say there are truths that can be timeless and not subject to what is "in fashion" (by the way, I realize to say something like "in fashion" may be considered inflammatory - that is not at all my intent. Mel, please accept my apology in advance if that comes off the wrong way to you. I simply am lacking a better way to phrase it at this moment.)

A little more direct, though, is the perhaps unintended inference that a new way of thinking is necessarily considered "progressive". I have to admit I sometime bristle when someone claims a certain belief is "progressive" because it's new and they self-proclaim it to be "progress". In the U.S., there is the claim many liberals make that their beliefs are "progressive", many time (not all) simply because they proclaim it to be. To the contrary, being a free-market capitalist I would argue that anything that smacks of socialism - despite being called progressive by some - is exactly the opposite of progress in the drive to encourage people to be free in conducting their lives as much as possible as they see fit as opposed to living to government decree. To our discussion, why are new thoughts that are challenging those traditional thoughts necessarily "progressive"? Sadly, it is in that vein that gave rise to Hitler, among others. I'm not trying to insinuate that Mel is suggesting Hitler should be considered progress, but just that we need to be careful what we are going to call progress, and why.

Marc, I would also agree that there are many arguments over trying to prove who is "more right". Perhaps somewhat ironically, in our drive to "find God" and be near as possible to Him, we get into these discussions of who is "more right". However, therein lies the "devil in the details", right?

Okay, all, on a somewhat related note, I just read an article in National Review Online. Click here for the link. I know NRO fairly explicitly represents itself as conservative U.S. political thought, but this one is not overtly political and is related to this forum if you have a few minutes. You will especially find it interesting if you have ever read "The Screwtape Letters" by C.S. Lewis.

Take care, my online acquaintances... Reply to this

Marc, to respond to Mel I think you took the words pretty close to out of my mouth. I would say there are truths that can be timeless and not subject to what is "in fashion" (by the way, I realize to say something like "in fashion" may be considered inflammatory - that is not at all my intent. Mel, please accept my apology in advance if that comes off the wrong way to you. I simply am lacking a better way to phrase it at this moment.)

Well I am not inflamed but I would like to ask you a question concerning ''progressive'' or ''in fashion'' beliefs.
There are rules in the bible(for example) that dont sit well with me. Call me fashionable but I dont think we should beat gay men with a stick or stone people to death for adultry...... Why is it necessary to punish peoples ''wrong doings'' so severely? It makes me feel uncomfortable with the rule book. Shouldnt religion progress with the rest of society and change its rules?
Reply to this

Although I know religion can get devisive at times this is because most people have know Idea what they believe or why they believe it. Most were born into their religion or not born into any this is why some call themselves atheists. But for me personally I was raised in a Luthern church background. I then was going my own way in sin and went to church to please my parents. At sixteen my parents divorced and when my mom left my dad I became sad and depressed and tried to fill the void in my life and lonliness by drugs and alchohol and other sinful practices which is what all sinners do wether religious or not since we all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. I got in trouble with the law for drinking and driving,etc. Had to go to a hearing and I told God if he got me out of this mess I would get right with him although I didnt know what that was totally. One day while listening to my favorite rock music in my car I heard a Christian station with preachers on it preaching from the Holy Bible. They said I was a lost sinner and needed to be born again to enter the kingdom of God or I would go to hell if I didnt. And my religion could not get me to heaven or my good works. After a couple of weeks listening and also turning it off because it frightened me I decided I didnt have anything to lose by trying it ,if they were wrong I would just die and go to heaven.But if they were right I would go to hell and I didnt want that forever. So when another preacher came on the radio I prayed with him to be saved from my sin and hell and ask the Lord Jesus to forgive my sins and save my soul from hell asking him to save me,and he did. I felt a load of guilt come off my back from all my sins and a peace in my heart like I had never had before. Then I read my Bible and later got into a Fundamental Christian and Baptist Church. Where I learned Gods word and grew spiritually. I then went to a Baptist college for three years and have tried to serve the Lord over the years although at times I have failed the Lord ,he has not failed me. And he has allowed me to be a witness for him in various places including the internet,and I thank God for all he has done in my life which includes giving me a wife and three children,one now married,and in my church. And he can do the same for anyone who is open to him and his dealings in their life. Thank You, Sincerely; Reply to this

Not always being obedient to him or his word. But the Bible says if we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. Our sins need to be primarily confessed to God unless we have sinned against someone elce then we should apologise to them. Reply to this

Although I know religion can get devisive at times this is because most people have know Idea what they believe or why they believe it.

There are religious leaders and teachers in most communities. Why have they been unable to to show us the reasons to believe something, in your opinion?

That said, I suspect George would say what most Protestants and Catholics would say ...............

I think there is more to what George is saying than what most Catholics and Protestants would say. He has obviously been able to find his spiriutal connection through a religion and that gave him enough peace and comfort to seek perfection within himself. Of course there is no person who is perfect, but the persistant effort to find perfection within ourselves allows us to reach our full potential as individuals.

Anybody who admires another person is seeing aspects of themselves in that person that are currently dormant or trying to develpe. They can connect to that part of themselves, through the example of the person they are admiring. This admired person is by no means perfect when one looks at them in relation to the outside world, but parts of them have achived an inner perfection. This person is Jesus for some, and somebody else for others.
Reply to this

what about you İslam? Reply to this

I am the odd ball here. Not only am I Catholic, but I am a Traditional Catholic who follows it as it was prior to Vatican II. I do not recognize Benedict as pope, as he has many non-Catholic beliefs and actions. I was raised in what we call the Novus Ordo (new order) Church of the mainstream Catholics. When I found out how much I had been robbed of by these changes and how strange they were to what Catholicism has always been, I converted back to the Traditional. (I was baptized in 1964, so it was traditional at that point.)

As to your question Muvahhidullah - I believe that everyone is spiritual. I don't believe in Islam, but everyone of even average intelligence knows there has to be a God. There are too many things out there that cannot be explained by natural causes. Hence, even if they have not been introduced to a religion, they create a god to fulfill the need & void they see. Reply to this

We believe in One God also - just Three Persons in One God. That is the mystery of the Trinity. But it is only One God. Reply to this

In the early 60's Vatican II changed a great deal of the belief system of the Catholic Church. Then in 1968 they changed the Mass entirely. It was not just a translation, but they deleted 60% of the prayers and of those that remained, they changed many of them, making it about a 90% change. I did not recognize the Mass the first time I attended it in Latin. I am trying to do this without being preachy - but it is a love of mine and that makes it hard, especially if I can't tell the why involved.

In order to be Catholic, according to the definition of the word given by the Church, you must be the same in both space and in time. I could go to Mass at any different century and follow it just fine now. Those who attend the Latin Mass could do so also. But in the vernacular masses that are said around the world (they called it the Novus Ordo Massea when it was written), it changes from chapel to chapel and is nothing like what it once was. The beliefs that were once set in stone are now seen through the 'spirit' of Vatican II and change from person to person.

Because of much of this and the behaviors and espoused beliefs of Benedict and a few prior in that position, I am sedevacantist, which means I recognize the authority of the papacy, but I do not believe the person there is the pope. (Literal translation of the word I believe is - the seat is empty.) Reply to this

Benedict was part of the architects of Vatican II. At the time he was considered a liberal. They have changed so much that today he is considered a conservative. I don't know what more the Catholic Church could have done during the holocaust. There were enough Catholics who joined the Jews in those ovens. And at the end of the war, the head rabbi of Italy stated no one had done as much as Pope Pius XII for them. But now they are re-writing history again. Reply to this