Why are many Christians so intolerant of other religions and spiritual paths?

[cj44]

Aren't they (along with the Golden Rule ) the "corner stones" of Christianity?

Indeed they are, but who can keep them? That is not to say we throw them out the window. People make a mistake in thinking that if they keep or try to keep the 10 commandments it will please God or give them entrance into heaven. That is not why God gave the 10 commandments. He gave them to realize that we fall way short. Yet, we imagine that we ain't all that bad and we are the apple of God's eye. After all, we haven't murdered anyone, right? Well, we have to look at Jesus' teaching on that one. If we harbor anger or hatred toward another we are guilty of murder. If we look at another woman or man lustfully, we have committed adultery. Jesus came to save the lost, the sinners. First, we need to know we are a sinner before we realize we need a Saviour. Jesus is the narrow door. Faith saves, not by works or keeping the 10 commandments.

Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin.

And now I must snooze. I am enslaved to my time zone.

I'd sooner be a good human on my own volition than by being threatened into goodness.

No one is threatening you Gilbert. Is your will always free to do good. Does your will ever choose do not do good?

 

[gerryh]

Gerry, the 10 commandments are not the only law God gave in the Old Testament. Ceremonial and Levitical Law were also given by God. I think you need to hear gospel more than law. The law is not going to save you. The law cannot save. It will only keep you in bondage. Back to my tortured analogy of a fish. Fish swim. they cannot alter their nature and one day decide to walk on land. Humans sin. We cannot alter our nature. Put down the burden and surrender. Jesus promised the Comforter - The Holy Spirit- Let him do the work. Be at peace in the salvatiion of Jesus.

No, they weren't "given by God". They were made by man. Jesus even made that clear when he was asked about divorce. Also, levitican law was part of the covenant with Moses. Christ brought a new Covenant.

Since Paul was so hot to keep the old testament laws, the old covenant laws, up and running, I discount what he has to say. He was the first, the original, fire and brimstone evangelist. I have very little use for fire and brimstone evangelists.

 

[cj44]

The genius of analogical sense made each of the four elements in the outer world the counterpart of a corresponding psychic mode of consciousness. Earth represented sensation; water matched emotion; air symbolized thought; and fire was the universal ancient emblem of the spirit-soul. At the mere listing of the chart the mind senses a fitness, if not some phases of actual suggestions of identity, of these correspondences. Earth is appropriate to the fact of sensation, because this psychic state is generated in a body composed of earthly elements, the physical. Paul reminds us that the natural man is of the earth, earthy. And how kindred seem emotion and water! Both are lightly mobile, fluid, unstable and readily changeable, shimmering at every turn of sun or wind. Likewise how close in affinity are air and thought! Both are invisible, yet alike they reveal their character by what they affect outwardly. It is a testimony to the reality of this correspondence between air and mind that virtually every people in the world, in casting about for words suitable to convey the idea of mind-soul-spirit, has simply appropriated for this concept the words for air, wind or breath. Mind and air are definite poetical counterparts of each other. Then fire; universally this chemical phenomenon, subsisting on air and some more subtly potent elements above it, gave man his most realistic conception of the fiery nature of the creative energy. "Spirit" is itself from the Latin spiro, I breathe. The breath keeps the fires of life burning. The Greek has it as pneuma, which again means "breath." To deeper reflection, the energy of life creative assumes the concept of a fiery potency, both able to build up and to dissolve. The light of the sun, naturally conceived to be the fiery energy of the creative power, was antiquity’s universal symbol for the life-giving power of the Logos. It was the great god Re in Egypt, whose hieroglyph is the sun. Expressing a recondite item of ancient esoteric knowledge, and one which modern science seems to be on the point of confirming, stands the statement of the Greek Neoplatonist Proclus: The light of the sun is the pure energy of intellect. Not man’s intellect, to be sure, but God’s, of which man’s is a miniature and potential copy.
This is verily a concept to stop one’s breath with its astounding significance: the suns in infinite space would then be the glowing fiery brain cells of God’s mind. When God said "Let there be light!," he carried out the command by the exertion of his mind. The light of the universe has been generated by the thinking process of the cosmic mind! Even at the human level, it is a fact that the act of steady thinking generates in the brain a quantum of heat and light, measurable by delicate electrical apparatus. Thought is known to be a product of the flash of electricity from one brain cell to another oppositely charged quite analogous to the lightning in a thunder-storm.
It is not surprising, then, that we find the so-called "Fire Philosophers" of the Medieval period expounding the theory that "every man has a little sun


THE ULTIMATE CANON OF KNOWLEDGE

Indeed you are right about Pneuma - Breath. Note Jesus breathed on his disciples in Acts. The Holy Spirit - wind, breath.
Again, the bell tolls and I must sleep.

No, they weren't "given by God". They were made by man. Jesus even made that clear when he was asked about divorce. Also, levitican law was part of the covenant with Moses. Christ brought a new Covenant.

Since Paul was so hot to keep the old testament laws, the old covenant laws, up and running, I discount what he has to say. He was the first, the original, fire and brimstone evangelist. I have very little use for fire and brimstone evangelists.

Gerry - I think we don't agree on some basic understandings of how God works in regards to his Word. I don't see Paul as the condemning sort that you do. That's alright though - I enjoy our discussions.

 

[JLM]

Indeed they are, but who can keep them? That is not to say we throw them out the window. People make a mistake in thinking that if they keep or try to keep the 10 commandments it will please God or give them entrance into heaven. That is not why God gave the 10 commandments. He gave them to realize that we fall way short. Yet, we imagine that we ain't all that bad and we are the apple of God's eye. After all, we haven't murdered anyone, right? Well, we have to look at Jesus' teaching on that one. If we harbor anger or hatred toward another we are guilty of murder. If we look at another woman or man lustfully, we have committed adultery. Jesus came to save the lost, the sinners. First, we need to know we are a sinner before we realize we need a Saviour. Jesus is the narrow door. Faith saves, not by works or keeping the 10 commandments.

Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin.

And now I must snooze. I am enslaved to my time zone.


No one is threatening you Gilbert. Is your will always free to do good. Does your will ever choose do not do good?

Most of us haven't murdered any people, at least not directly! I think of the Ten Commandments as a guide, if you live by them you won't go too far wrong. Some of them may be out of date (if everyone shut down on the Sabbath it would lead to disaster) other than that there's no harm in abiding by the rest of them.

 

[cj44]

Most of us haven't murdered any people, at least not directly! I think of the Ten Commandments as a guide, if you live by them you won't go too far wrong. Some of them may be out of date (if everyone shut down on the Sabbath it would lead to disaster) other than that there's no harm in abiding by the rest of them.

JLM: A fine comment I awake to this morning! "If everyone shut down on the Sabbath it would lead to disaster" ...."some of them may be out of date". Sabbath means rest. It does not mean Saturday or Sunday. Things already look pretty disasterous, maybe if we kept His commandment, things wouldn't be so bad. Pick a day and rest. And if you take time to read His Word it will be rest and blessing for your soul.

"Most of us haven't murdered any people".... Not according to God and I would think His opinion should be paid attention to. 1John3:15 "Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you kow that no murderer has eternal life in him". Matthew 5:22 21 “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

Let's see what else you say, "...other than that there's no harm in abiding by the rest of them." I did not mean to suggest we should not abide by them. There are three "uses" of the law (10 commandments). The following is by my pastor.

First Use of the law is that it acts like a curb. It seeks to prevent us from doing the wrong thing, the way a curb tries to prevent a car from going off the road and hurting anything.
The Second Use of the law is that it acts like a mirror. It seeks to show us our sins. It shows us what we look like under the microscope of God's will and Word.
The Thrid Use of the law is that it acts like a guide. It seeks to instruct the Christian on what he/she should do to live a God-pleasing lif in response to God's love and forgiveness in Jesus.

I do not think the 10 commandments are out of date.

 

[Blackleaf]

You are a below average run of the mill racist.

Muslimes and Papists aren't a race. They are both evil sects. Race has nothing to do with it. Sorry about that.

 

[Cliffy]

Muslimes and Papists aren't a race. They are both evil sects. Race has nothing to do with it. Sorry about that.

So, you are a sectist then. Doesn't matter, you are still a bigot and your attitude toward others is most definitely is in opposition to Christ's teachings. Which leads me to believe that you are either trolling or intensely ignorant.

 

[JLM]

Muslimes and Papists aren't a race. They are both evil sects. Race has nothing to do with it. Sorry about that.

"Muslimes", never heard of them! Are you talking through your hat again?

 

[cj44]

Muslimes and Papists aren't a race. They are both evil sects. Race has nothing to do with it. Sorry about that.

Blackleaf, Race is not the only thing by which people can direct hate. For God so loved the world... That means everybody - the world. Are you a Christian? A person can disagree with another's religion/doctrines/teaching without hating the person. For instance a person of the Hindu faith may warn me to be careful of what she would describe as intentional sins. She may go on to tell my that I will pay a price of karmic consequences. I could agree with her on this level. Let's say I steal a diamond necklace from my neighbor. The karmic consequence is that I eventually get caught and go to jail. Well, the Bible teaches as much, so we can agree on that point. We would disagree in regards to salavation (and that would also depend on the Hindu sect as beliefs vary). Likely a Hindu would tell me salvation is attained by good deeds. As a Christian, I would say only by faith in Christ are we saved. From there we wouldn't get into a fist fight! Rather we go out to lunch and continue to be friends. Is this so crazy??? What excuse will we have before God for not being kind to one another? Living in America no less. Freedom of Speech - we have no excuse. . Maybe take more time to think out what you want to say before you type it. Many problems and war result in poor communication. Words are weapons if used willy nilly. Don't equate listening to another's beliefs as denying your own (or Christ). Also, don't look at the wigged out fanatics of any religion or philosophy and assume the entire lot believes and behaves in the same way. We Christians don't have a lot of room to talk with some of the wide eyed, loud mouthed imbeciles that claim to be Christian. There is a jackazz on every block and in every religion. Yes? Yet, we stick to what is good and strive to always help and care for our neighbor. No matter who he or she may be. Yes?

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

There is plenty of evidence that God exists, but none whatsoever that he DOESN'T exist.

Love to hear it, so long as it doesn't involve circular reasoning such as "God made the world, therefore the existence of the world proves the existence of God), appeals to popularity ("Bazillions of believers can't be wrong"), or demands for "faith" (which one wag called "believing something you know damn well ain't true).

 

[cj44]

Love to hear it, so long as it doesn't involve circular reasoning such as "God made the world, therefore the existence of the world proves the existence of God), appeals to popularity ("Bazillions of believers can't be wrong"), or demands for "faith" (which one wag called "believing something you know damn well ain't true).

T-Bones, you mean to tell me when you look into the eyes of a little puppy or watch a majestic beast such as a moose meander through a forest you don't think to yourself - there must be a God and He really must be amazing to make creatures such as these?

 

[Blackleaf]

So, you are a sectist then. Doesn't matter, you are still a bigot and your attitude toward others is most definitely is in opposition to Christ's teachings. Which leads me to believe that you are either trolling or intensely ignorant.

You call me a "bigot" yet I'm not who started a Christianophobic thread.

I seem to be the only one to have noticed the hypocrisy that the Christianophobes on here are amongst the first to cry "racist!" when I attack the evil papist church. So what's going on? Is it open season on all Christian churches except the Catholic one?

As for the Muslimes, musn't say anything nasty about them, musn't we? It's fine to attack Christians, as this thread shows (as long as it isn't Catholics), but we musn't upset Muslims.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

T-Bones, you mean to tell me when you look into the eyes of a little puppy or watch a majestic beast such as a moose meander through a forest you don't think to yourself - there must be a God and He really must be amazing to make creatures such as these?

Nope. Tell me, when you think of bubonic plague, or smallpox, or hyaenas, or rats, or leeches, do you think about the wonder and majesty of God and how amazing he must be to create creatures such as these?

You call me a "bigot" yet I'm not who started a Christianophobic thread.

You don't have to be a Christianophobe to be a bigot.

I seem to be the only one to have noticed the hypocrisy that the Christianophobes on here are amongst the first to cry "racist!" when I attack the evil papist church. So what's going on? Is it open season on all Christian churches except the Catholic one?

You hate non-whites (among others) and want to deprive them of legal equality based on the colour of their skins or which fairy tale they believe. How is that not racist?

As for the Muslimes, musn't say anything nasty about then, musn't we? It's fine to attack Christians, as this thread shows (as long as it isn't Catholics), but we musn't upset Muslims.

Some of them are complete jerks, just like some Christians. Most of them kinda quietly follow their fairy tale and don't bother other folk.

 

[cj44]

T-Bones, You said, "Nope. Tell me, when you think of bubonic plague, or smallpox, or hyaenas, or rats, or leeches, do you think about the wonder and majesty of God and how amazing he must be to create creatures such as these?"

You are kind of a glass half empty person aren't you?
Actually, I think about how God is always right. Sin entered and with it came the plague etc. Though, I don't have a problem with rats or hyenas.
Hmm. Ok, so the puppies line didn't make you budge, what about a cute little baby seal or a kitten. Those are some pretty nifty pieces of God's work.

 

[Goober]

You call me a "bigot" yet I'm not who started a Christianophobic thread.

I seem to be the only one to have noticed the hypocrisy that the Christianophobes on here are amongst the first to cry "racist!" when I attack the evil papist church. So what's going on? Is it open season on all Christian churches except the Catholic one?

As for the Muslimes, musn't say anything nasty about them, musn't we? It's fine to attack Christians, as this thread shows (as long as it isn't Catholics), but we musn't upset Muslims.

You are doing this.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

T-Bones, You said, "Nope. Tell me, when you think of bubonic plague, or smallpox, or hyaenas, or rats, or leeches, do you think about the wonder and majesty of God and how amazing he must be to create creatures such as these?"

You are kind of a glass half empty person aren't you?

Not really, though I don't see how my personality type, whatever it may be, is relevant to the discussion.

I was simply pointing out that, if "All things bright and beautiful" are an argument for the existence of a benevolent and loving God, then presumably all things dark and ugly must be either a refutation of that argument, or an argument for the existence of a malevolent and cruel God.

And that is, frankly, one of the things that offends me about many (not all) Christians. The dogma, or at least expectation, that we must thank and praise God for the good things in the world, but not blame or complain about the bad things. If all things flow from God, then puppies and rats have to be in the balance.

Actually, I think about how God is always right. Sin entered and with it came the plague etc. Though, I don't have a problem with rats or hyenas.

You have yet to establish that a god exists. I could make some fairly sophisticated arguments about how rats and hyaenas, and even plague and smallpox, are if not beautiful, necessary to the world.

Another thing that offends me: those Christians (and other religions, by the way) who say that AIDS or floods or what-have-you are just punishment for this or that sin. If that's true, God has lousy aim with his smiting arm.

Hmm. Ok, so the puppies line didn't make you budge, what about a cute little baby seal or a kitten. Those are some pretty nifty pieces of God's work.

I'm fond of corvids. I find them beautiful. Most folk, particularly Europeans, don't.

Either way, you are assuming God made them. Which is fine for you, I got no problem with it. I'm simply pointing out that you have not yet demonstrated to my satisfaction that there is a God. This is a circular argument. You cannot prove the existence of God with the unsupported assertion that God created the world or anything in it.

 

[cj44]

I didn't know what a corvid was, so I looked it up. A fine bird, very fine.

No I cannot prove or disprove the existence of God. Though, I find creation a real big plus in the he exists column.
The debate -"if God is good or exists then why does he allow bad things to happen or exist" has been going on for all centuries. Can't answer it here. Sometimes truth comes without explanation.

Back to the corvid - I rather am fond of crows. Now I shall have to see if this lovely gem flys about in my neck of the woods.

You are doing this.

Hey. How did you get a picture of me?

 

[DaSleeper]

 

[darkbeaver]

CASE OF THE MISSING MESSIAHDr. Albert Schweitzer is justly rated as among the most eminent theologians of the Christian Church. His statement is put forth near the end of a work which demonstrates to any reader the stupendous range and thoroughness of its author’s survey of the whole field of literary criticism of the New Testament. Indeed his book, The Quest of the Historical Jesus, stands as unquestionably the most searching, as well as the most perspicacious, work ever produced on this vast and complicated subject. We give his declaration for its startling significance and the weight of its incontestable authority.

Taken from page 398 of his book, it reads thus: "The Jesus of Nazareth who came forward publicly as the Messiah, who preached
the ethic of the Kingdom of God, who founded the Kingdom of Heaven upon
earth, and died to give his work its final consecration, never had any existence.
He is a figure designed by rationalism, endowed with life by liberalism and
clothed by modern theology in a historical garb."

This, then, is the grand upshot of the life study of one of the most consecrated, learned and respected Christian theologians. Yet it will be disregarded in ecclesiastical circles as if it had never been uttered. And the hierarchical power of the Christian Church will continue broadcasting the legend of its origination by the physically born Son of the Creator of the Universe, dispatched to earth in the year 1 A. D.

But beyond cavil the scholar who has presented the most telling body of evidence in the case for the non-historicity of Jesus and the non-historical basis of virtually all Bible books, is one whose monumental writings assemble such a prodigious mass of data of the most overwhelmingly conclusive character that the vested interests of the ecclesiastical world have had to put the stamp of official disapproval and repudiation upon his challenging books.

Too dangerous to publicize his data by public refutation, his books have been given the treatment of silence. This scholar is Gerald Massey, and his six great volumes under the titles of The Book of the Beginnings, The Natural Genesis, and, greatest of all, Ancient Egypt, The Light of the World, each work in two volumes. When one goes studiously through these truly revealing tomes, the mass and character of the data presented leave only one conclusion possible: the existence of the Gospel figure of Jesus, considered as a man human born, is not a predication that can be accepted by a rational mind.
Considered from many points of view, these books of Massey are among the most strategically important ever written, since they establish beyond cavil the baselessness, the complete falsity of the claims and basic theses on which the historical edifice of the great Christian religion is grounded.

​

 

[cj44]

CASE OF THE MISSING MESSIAHDr. Albert Schweitzer is justly rated as among the most eminent theologians of the Christian Church. His statement is put forth near the end of a work which demonstrates to any reader the stupendous range and thoroughness of its author’s survey of the whole field of literary criticism of the New Testament. Indeed his book, The Quest of the Historical Jesus, stands as unquestionably the most searching, as well as the most perspicacious, work ever produced on this vast and complicated subject. We give his declaration for its startling significance and the weight of its incontestable authority.

Taken from page 398 of his book, it reads thus: "The Jesus of Nazareth who came forward publicly as the Messiah, who preached
the ethic of the Kingdom of God, who founded the Kingdom of Heaven upon
earth, and died to give his work its final consecration, never had any existence.
He is a figure designed by rationalism, endowed with life by liberalism and
clothed by modern theology in a historical garb."

This, then, is the grand upshot of the life study of one of the most consecrated, learned and respected Christian theologians. Yet it will be disregarded in ecclesiastical circles as if it had never been uttered. And the hierarchical power of the Christian Church will continue broadcasting the legend of its origination by the physically born Son of the Creator of the Universe, dispatched to earth in the year 1 A. D.

But beyond cavil the scholar who has presented the most telling body of evidence in the case for the non-historicity of Jesus and the non-historical basis of virtually all Bible books, is one whose monumental writings assemble such a prodigious mass of data of the most overwhelmingly conclusive character that the vested interests of the ecclesiastical world have had to put the stamp of official disapproval and repudiation upon his challenging books.

Too dangerous to publicize his data by public refutation, his books have been given the treatment of silence. This scholar is Gerald Massey, and his six great volumes under the titles of The Book of the Beginnings, The Natural Genesis, and, greatest of all, Ancient Egypt, The Light of the World, each work in two volumes. When one goes studiously through these truly revealing tomes, the mass and character of the data presented leave only one conclusion possible: the existence of the Gospel figure of Jesus, considered as a man human born, is not a predication that can be accepted by a rational mind.
Considered from many points of view, these books of Massey are among the most strategically important ever written, since they establish beyond cavil the baselessness, the complete falsity of the claims and basic theses on which the historical edifice of the great Christian religion is grounded.

​

Jeepers, Beavs. You just turned me into an athiest..

Surely, I jest. Good Old Schweitzer ain't got nuttin on knowing Jesus.

Sleeper, excellent selection of God's handiwork.