theological philosophy

[Paddy]

Without going into all the gruesome details, I came to my Christian faith by way of Satan.  It was at the moment Satan's very real existence became crystal clear to me, that I knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that Jesus Christ is who He said He is.

[BrokenPaw]

HR, the religions you're describing believe in gods that differ significantly from one another.  How can they all describe the same "Divine;" and if they do, why pay any attention to any of them?

Fistful,
Consider the shadow of a short section of pipe, cast on the ground in the sunlight.  The pipe is a three-dimensional object, but its shadow is two-dimensional.  Now suppose that four people are shown the shadow, but not the pipe.  But each of those four are shown the shadow when the pipe was facing a different direction.

One was shown the shadow when the pipe was axially aligned with the sun.  He sees a ring.
One was shown the shadow when the pipe was angled slightly, so that only a bit of light got through.  He sees something rather like an eye.
One was shown the shadow when the sun no longer passed through the pipe.  He sees something shaped rather like a Tylenol caplet.
One was shown the shadow when the pipe was perpendicular to the sun's rays.  He sees a rectangle.

If you ask all of these people to describe the object that caused the shadow, you will likely get four different descriptions.

The way humans view the Divine is like this; we see the shadow, but the shadow itself is not the Divine.  The shadow is the part of the Divine that we can perceive with our limited understanding and perspective, and it is arrogant of us to assume that because we perceive it thus, everyone else will (or should) as well.

I wonder at the thinking that causes someone to say that the deity they follow is omnipotent and capable of all things, but then turn around and say that the deity cannot or will not appear in some other aspect to people of a different perspective.  

This is not a judgement; merely an observation.

For myself, I am an eclectic pagan with Druidic leanings.  I reached this place by following a path that led from apathy, through Atheism, into Christianity and out the other side, into Wicca, and eventually to where I am.  That journey took twenty years.  I wonder where I'll be in another decade.

Namaste,
-BP

(edited because apparently I cannot proofread very well)

[Stand_watie]

Unless we "believe" we are "fools", "corrupt", "vile" and can do no good.

Not exactly - all human beings, minus one, are fools, vile, corrupt and can do no good. Disbelief in God is but a single manifestation of the human condition.



2 The LORD looks down from heaven
       on the sons of men
       to see if there are any who understand,
       any who seek God.

    3 All have turned aside,
       they have together become corrupt;
       there is no one who does good,
       not even one.

Ecclesiastes 7

20 There is not a righteous man on earth
       who does what is right and never sins

Ain't righteous

by Bob Dylan

When a man he serves the Lord, it makes his life worthwhile.
It don't matter 'bout his position, it don't matter 'bout his lifestyle.
Talk about perfection, I ain't never seen none
And there ain't no man righteous, no not one.

Sometimes the devil likes to drive you from the neighborhood.
He'll even work his ways through those whose intentions are good.
Some like to worship on the moon, others are worshipping the sun
And there ain't no man righteous, no not one.

Look around, ya see so many social hypocrites
Like to make rules for others while they do just the opposite.

You can't get to glory by the raising and the lowering of no flag.
Put your goodness next to God's and it comes out like a filthy rag.
In a city of darkness there's no need of the sun
And there ain't no man righteous, no not one.

Done so many evil things in the name of love, it's a crying shame
I never did see no fire that could put out a flame.

Pull your hat down, baby, pull the wool down over your eyes,
Keep a-talking, baby, 'til you run right out of alibis.
Someday you'll account for all the deeds that you done.
Well, there ain't no man righteous, no not one.

God got the power, man has got his vanity,
Man gotta choose before God can set him free.
Don't you know there's nothing new that's under the sun?
Well, there ain't no man righteous, no not one.

When I'm gone don't wonder where I be.
Just say that I trusted in God and that Christ was in me.
Say He defeated the devil, He was God's chosen Son
And that there ain't no man righteous, no not one.

[grampster]

Broken Paw,

But what if the pipe itself showed up one day and many people had an opportunity to be in the presence of the pipe itself, to experience it fully with all their senses.  The pipe said and did many disturbing things in the presence of many, including stating that he was indeed the pipe; causing the pipe to be totally rethreaded.   Later some of the same people who saw the pipe rethreaded, and others as well,  fully experienced the old familiar pipe with all their senses again.  In other words, they did not see the pipe's shadow, but the pipe itself and were convinced of it.

 These folks wrote down their experiences and other vignettes to be shared with their posterity.  Oddly what they wrote down seemed to square up with some earlier predictions about the fact that the pipe would come around at some time.  Now allowing the fact (through witnesses that all basically say the same thing--tough for a bunch of witnesses to do that, by the way.) that the pipe truly was the pipe and not his shadow, would the pipe not want an accurate record kept? (this goes to the meaning of the written record being altered by translation)
 
Now it is up to each individual to decide what to make of the actual presence and claims of the pipe.  Surely, one can then keep on looking for shadows of the pipe and find them fairly easily and decide to keep looking.  But,  it seems to me, one would rather see the pipe itself than to keep on guessing about what the pipe truly is and be content with a shadow.  But it also seems to me that all the evidence, when compared to basis of evidentiary record keeping and the validity of same, tends to bear out the claim of the pipe and the witnesses.  ("Evidence that Demands a Verdict", can't remember the author, large book, 1/3 postulations and attempts to discredit the claims of the pipe and the witnesses and 2/3 bibliography, interesting book regarding the veracity of the tale of the pipe.  The conclusion was that the pipe was among us.  There was also another fellow that spent his entire life learning how to read and understand as many languages as he could.  He found that no matter what language one dealt with, when discussing the pipe, all meanings squared up.)

I'll stop here before I get to rambling on.

[BrokenPaw]

Grampster,

I take your point.  What I was attempting to say in my post is that the pipe[0] is, by its very nature, beyond the possibility of full comprehension by humans.  Just as two-dimensional creatures would be unable to perceive our exemplary pipe, so I believe that we, as humans who exist and perceive in three dimensions, are incapable of fully comprehending the Divine, which exists outside the scope of three dimensions.

Just as the pipe I described can be rendered in two dimensions only by removing much detail, so the Divine which is beyond our understanding can be rendered in terms we can understand, only by limiting its scope.  So in a place where people wore sandals and met in synagogues, it would make sense that if the Divine wished to make itself known to the people of that region, it might do so in the form of a human man who wore sandals and did things that made sense to the people of that region.

I believe that it's possible that the Divine could also appear in other ways to other people in different places.  If a man in sandals and a robe had showed up in the frigid north, the locals there might not have been able to identify with him as one of them.  So perhaps the Divine chose to reveal itself to the Norse people in a different way.  As a one-eyed man with two ravens, possibly.  Who knows?

I am not in any way attempting to say that Jesus was not who He said He was.  But I am saying that there may be other aspects of Divinity that mankind has perceived, and those ways may simply be different perceptions (limited by our own capacities) of the same underlying Divine spirit.[1]

I am not saying that Christianity is wrong.  I am saying that Christianity being right does not intrinsically mean that all other perceptions of Divinity are wrong.

Namaste,
-BP

• This analogy is going to make continued discourse along this line very odd
[1] "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." -Hamlet, Shakespeare

[280plus]

I believe that we, as humans who exist and perceive in three dimensions, are incapable of fully comprehending the Divine, which exists outside the scope of three dimensions.

Exactly as I'd want to put itand then I would ask why has man taken this Divine and given it the characterisics of a man who would, by nature, deem me vile, corrupt and incapable of no good. There are many who seek God and seek to understand "Him" I'm just not accepting of the the many ways man tries to manifest what ever it is we call "God" or the "Divine". Maybe we are too imperfect to truly manifest the concept. I think that's what Broken paw is getting at. Thos last posts took a couple of rereads! WHEW!

[grampster]

"I believe that we, as humans who exist and perceive in three dimensions, are incapable of fully comprehending the Divine, which exists outside the scope of three dimensions."
 

Quite accurate, which may be why He decided to enter His creation so that the created might better get a handle on how to be more receptive to the notion of faith.

Jesus himself also spoke of His Father's house having many mansions and His need to see to His other flocks.  I suppose we could argue about this for a good long time.  But I have this feeling that the bottom line is that somehow all "religions" in some fashion point to Jesus, even those "religions" that may not appear as religions at all.  Many of the worlds religions seem to be intellectual, a seeking of a higher plain or a holding of nature in wonder.  The teaching there imho is that one has the ability to find what is findeable.  Remember Christian teaching says that God's will is that ALL be saved.  But at the same time He gave us free will; we can reject Him.  What I don't think is that the mystery needs to remain a mystery.  I believe we have been granted something embeded in us that allows us to understand all that we need to understand.  We certainly cannot undestand the unknowable.  "Now we see as through a glass darkly, then we shall see things as they really are."  The implication is that there is vision, but not total clarity.  But one does have all the tools to be able to see what is there to be seen.  With respect to the argument about stone aged tribesmen and the like...my response is "To whom much is given, much is expected."

I don't claim to have any inside track on any of this.  I only know what I know and how it pertains for me.  As such I do not discount any other faith or religion except that I don't see the need for me to continue to look at shadows.  Since I came to this place about 20 years ago, there is a part of me that is satified, totally.  Does that mean I am not affected by life.  No.  It's just that my perspective is now more connected to the 7 beatitudes rather than being mystified.

I do think there is a pecking order though.  Israel seems to be placed in the forefront.  Israel seems to be connected in the doings of Man in many ways throughout history including the present.  "God chides those He loves."  Thus the validity of the Old Testament travails of Israel and their dealings with men under the auspices of God in the earth in those days when God did not hold men accountable.   God is accountable to no one and Man is accountable to God.  So it seems to me there must have been a reason for all the slaying and begetting; perhaps to show us what we're capable of from all points of the 3 dimensional human perspective.   Perhaps that is why He did not hold Men accountable in those times.  All that is just part of the lesson and teaches the value of history and how there is cause and effect in the dealings of Man when he conficts with the order of things.  There is science, the arts and all else with respect to cause and effect when one looks at the OT and the happenings of those days.  The Old Testament Book of Ecclesiastes deals with that notion very well, I think, from the aspect of having everything.  Job pretty well sums up when one goes from having everything to having nothing except the ability to breathe, and painfully for all that.
Sometimes my ability to ramble amazes even me.

[richyoung]

Christian in general, Southern Baptist more specifically.  I don't know for sure if He plans to storm Hell (..that ALL be saved) after Judgement Day, but if he is, I hope the late Captain James Doherty, (Ret.) is saving a roster spot for me...

[Paddy]

I am saying that Christianity being right does not intrinsically mean that all other perceptions of Divinity are wrong.

I couldn't agree more.  Faith and the 'search' are dynamic processes that wax and wane with individual experiences.  A nugget of truth today that is cherished and embraced can be cast away as worthless tomorrow.  My own experience follows this path.  As a child, I was taught Roman Catholicism, which I diligently practiced until my mid teens.  I then embarked on a path that took me through alternative religions and tantra yoga.  While I was exploring the universal subconcious mind, I met up with some Rosicrucians and learned astral projection (it's real, by the way).   I later became involved in witchcraft and was learning how to make objects holy when a born again Christian gave me a copy of the bible.  I decided to read it from cover to cover and that's when he (Satan) showed up.  For real.  In the flesh.  I alternately played with, fought and unsuccessfully tried to ignore him for years.  Ultimately, faced with the inescapable truth that Jesus Christ is who he said he is, I fell to my knees one sunny afternoon in a public park a little over 20 years ago and accepted Him as Lord and Savior.  I've been on that path ever since.

One cannot discount the power of the supernatural forces around us in their influence on us.  Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it ain't there. If we are seeking, we only have to open the door a little for what I now know is the Holy Spirit to push us in the right direction.

[grampster]

Riley,

I once listened to a guy who was bringing bibles to India and other 3rd world places. (Main focus was India)   He had been doing that for many years and as a result learned a lot about Hinduism and other types of religions of the East as well as modern secular humanism.  

He said a powerful thing that day.  It was this:  "There is no question that any of these things (varying beliefs, sects, practices etc) are real.  The question is...is it true!  I was really shaken when I heard him say this.   That for me, remains the intrinsic question; Is it true!

I was also raised Roman Catholic and then went about the business of Myself starting in my 30's, angry at organized religion.  I just ignored it.  Then I had an experience that led me to begin seeking the truth.  I found the truth, of all places, in the The Book of Mormon.  I can't remember the exact words in the last chapter, but the essence was that this book had revealed something different than what I had been accustomed too, but that I should ask the Holy Spirit to reveal the truth of the words I'd read.  So I did so and wound up a few weeks later becaming a born again Christian while I was trying to sell a life insurance policy to Christian bible student studying to be a protestant preacher.  I also feel drawn back to Roman Catholocism, why I don't know.  I'm not angry at the organized Church anymore, either.  Also not a Mormon, Which is why I think no matter what the sect, even though the practices may not be true, can point the way to Jesus.

[Perd Hapley]

280plus,

What I mean to say is that you are putting pressure on Stand_waite because if he does not agree with you and take back his words, he is a big meanie.  Oh, wait, they're not his words, are they?  What if he believes they're the words of God, and is citing them as such?  If they are the words of God, then you are very foolish and vile to argue with them.  If not, don't worry about it.  


I think the posts by Hunter Rose and BrokenPaw illlustrate well that the "all-roads-lead-to-God" way of thinking (is there a word for that? ultraecumenical?) is one that fails to show any respect for the religions involved.  

First, one has to throw out half of each religion so that the remaining halves fit together.  What you are left with is a shifting, patchwork moral code.

Secondly, you remove the basis of many religions, which is revealed truth (the Bible, Koran, etc.)  To HR and BP, religions are only men's perceptions.  This is not what Christianity, Islam and other religions teach.  In fact, this point of view doesn't leave religion with much credibility at all.  So what is such religion worth?  Why don't I follow the religion of the BTK killer, so I can have slaves in the afterlife, so long as I pick the ones I want and torture and kill them first?

[griz]

On another thread Matis said:

"I believe that religion is the best answer we have to the human condition."

That works for me. I happen to believe that what we see before us is too incredible to come about by chance. I don't care what you call the creator, I like the Nature is God idea myself. But I think it's arrogant to think you have it all figured out and can tell others that their beliefs are wrong. I see enough similarities in so many of the worlds religions that they seem to be more mirrors of their cultures rather than rules handed down by that particular creator.

So it's all good for this Frisbetarian.

[280plus]

What I mean to say is that you are putting pressure on Stand_waite because if he does not agree with you and take back his words, he is a big meanie.

Not my intent at all and if I AM doing that I apologize profusely. I'm not questioning his beliefs, I'm trying to sort out MY beliefs. HE is entitled to his beliefs just as much as I am to mine. I think what griz just posted is about where I'm at. I see "God" or Divinity in the nature that is all around me. I remember an old "Davey and Goliath" episode. The gist was "God is everywhere." Is "God" a humanoid form that I should fear retribution from? I have my doubts.

If they are the words of God, then you are very foolish and vile to argue with them.  If not, don't worry about it.

One would have to make that determination before venturing much further.

I look at it yet another way. If questioning the existence of a "God" will lead me down the path to a lake of fire or blackness after death I'm taking a pretty fair risk doing so wouldn't you say? Should I just cower at the notions and go along with the flow? Does this make me vile? Not in my opinion.

Why are we taught to fear both "God" and "Satan"? If I try my best every day to beat back the devil, isn't that enough for "God"?

[grampster]

280,

Every adventure has to have a starting point.  That means a decision has to be made.  If you are looking for God, then you are standing in the midst of myriads of choices.  I will offer you one.

If I could be so bold, I would suggest a book called "Evidence That Demands a Verdict" by Josh McDowel.  Why??  Well Mr. McDowell was an atheist who began putting this book together in order to refute Christianity and came to quite another conclusion.  He backs up his research, which took many years, with much evidence that can be accessedn independently.  Also "Mere Christianity" by  C.S. Lewis.  Why??  Because Mr. Lewis, a great British scholar, started out an agnostic who became a great apologist for Christianity and explains his position very simply and understandably.  Another author, J.I. Packer, wrote another study called "God's Words".  Why??  I don't know, I just read it 20 years ago when I was in the midst of reaching out for the meaning of my existance and I found it to be helpful.

Please don't get me wrong, I am not seeking to proseletyse you.  I think from my earlier posts I have made clear that any decision a person makes in this regard is totally personal and singular.  I found these three people fascinating and what they had to say equally so.  My father, RIP, also found God in nature.  He was a trout fisherman without equal.  He fished the virgin streams of Michigan for weeks at a time when most of the roads were dusty 2 tracks and gravel roads in the early 20th century.  I am as convinced as a man could be that his faith in the Creator of the woodlands, streams, and meadows he loved and, Who saw him through the horror of WWII, caused him to rest in the company of that Creator.  Jesus was in the company of fishermen as well.

The fact that you seek, convinces me that you will find.

Best regards,
grampster

PS: I find the tone of this discussion to be very polite and respectful as it should be.  I salute my fellow/maidenly Society members.

[Strings]

PLEASE don't take this post as an insult, anybody. But this is about the only way *I* can think of to put this...


Let's take Jesus (as a concept, not a person), and see if it DOES fit into the concept of "all religions have validity".

 We have divinity seeing things at @ year 0 as being somewhat stagnant: mankind seems to be in something of a rut, and a new pardigm is needed. So: he embodies one mortal with his essence, and sets him on Earth.  This being is the son of a carpenter in the Middle East...

 He lives out his life, attempting to teach a new philosophical idea to mankind. As with most new ideas, he's vilified for the attempt, eventually being executed. But his ideas take hold, giving mankind a new concept to carry itself forward in life...

 Thus, you have the birth of Christianity, yet still retain the concept of all religions having validity. Christianity is just a new way for mankind to connect to Divinity: mainly for those who feel the need to have "one set way"...

 Fast forward to @ 1957, and Gerald Gardener comes up with another "new way". It's called "Wicca", and becomes a fairly fast-growing thing. It offers a way to connect directly with Divinity (something that seems to be lacking in many other faiths). It works for people. This doesn't invalidate anyone's faith in Christ: it's simply another way of connecting...

 I can't think of any other way of explaining it. Unfortunately, I think WAY too many people are caught up in the conceit of "one true way", that they can't see the problem...

[grampster]

Hunter:

     I don't think all religions have "validity" in and of themselves.   The concept I have poorly described is that all religions "may" in some way, ultimately,  point to Jesus.  This does not make them valid.  Rather it makes them usefull.

  Jesus claimed to be "truth, light, way" and "No one comes to the Father except through me" and "I am in the Father, the Father is in Me.  Whoever is in Me is in the Father".  If this is so, it does not preclude the availability of other faiths which point to Him, even unwittingly.  Wicca may just do that, but in a different way than, say, Suthrin Baptists.  Christians, if they understand their own faith, have to admit they have been grafted into Israel.  On the other hand, why do we continually need to find "another way" to connect with Divinity if the Truth is already there for all to see?  To answer my own question, maybe, because each individual seems to seek the Divinity in differnt ways.  I think that's why I postulate what I do.  I believe Jesus is exactly who He says He is.  It is entirely possible that there are myriads of ways to come to that conclusion.  
Regarding Jesus:  He made a specific claim to Divinity.  So, that leaves us with only three possible conclusions.  He is insane.  He is a liar.  He is who He says He is.

[Stand_watie]

Not my intent at all and if I AM doing that I apologize profusely. I'm not questioning his beliefs, I'm trying to sort out MY beliefs. HE is entitled to his beliefs just as much as I am to mine.

No offense taken on this end, I just wanted to clarify that the persons being critiqued by the various references were all humanity, not just atheists.

I look at it yet another way. If questioning the existence of a "God" will lead me down the path to a lake of fire or blackness after death I'm taking a pretty fair risk doing so wouldn't you say? Should I just cower at the notions and go along with the flow? Does this make me vile? Not in my opinion.

Along the same vein (and I'll say that I'm attempting to explain the Christian philosophy here rather than argue it), it's not the questioning of God's existence that takes you down that path, it's a path that you were born into.

Actually genuine questioning of God and a search for truth often leads people in the right direction, see grampster's references above, and here is another from the book of Acts

26Now an angel of the Lord said to Philip, "Go south to the road--the desert road--that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza." 27So he started out, and on his way he met an Ethiopian eunuch, an important official in charge of all the treasury of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians. This man had gone to Jerusalem to worship, 28and on his way home was sitting in his chariot reading the book of Isaiah the prophet. 29The Spirit told Philip, "Go to that chariot and stay near it."
30Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet. "Do you understand what you are reading?" Philip asked.
31"How can I," he said, "unless someone explains it to me?" So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.
32The eunuch was reading this passage of Scripture:
   "He was led like a sheep to the slaughter,
       and as a lamb before the shearer is silent,
       so he did not open his mouth.
    33In his humiliation he was deprived of justice.
       Who can speak of his descendants?
       For his life was taken from the earth."
34The eunuch asked Philip, "Tell me, please, who is the prophet talking about, himself or someone else?" 35Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus.
36As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, "Look, here is water. Why shouldn't I be baptized?" 38And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him. 39When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord suddenly took Philip away, and the eunuch did not see him again, but went on his way rejoicing

[Felonious Monk/Fignozzle]

Lord, Liar, Lunatic.  Which one is it?
(a lyric I recall from my days at the Sudden Baddest grad school)

Some Thoughts, FWIW: Hunter Rose said "Unfortunately, I think WAY too many people are caught up in the conceit of "one true way", that they can't see the problem..."

I know for me, it was the TOTAL opposite of conceit that I had to deal with, in order to come to peace with a Christian belief system.  There are blustery pontifications and convincing apologetics and huge tomes written on "Why I am a Member of the First Church of the Frozen Chosen", by Hugh Betterbe.  A smart person can read all of this and be reasonably sold on the systematic theology and logic behind a bunch of totally disparate beliefs; at the time you're reading them, there seems little or no wiggle room to come to any conclusion but the one the author is herding you towards.

But in the quiet of my own heart, I had to come as a child, letting go of my intellectualism, in order to embrace a faith built not on convincing evidence, or amazing stories, but this one, childishly simple belief...
"Jesus loves me, this I know
For the Bible tells me so.
Little ones to Him belong,
We are weak, but he is strong."

It makes LESS than zero sense, when approached with the battle implements of logic and debate.

However, for those who can come as a child, and who have eyes to see, ears to hear and a heart to understand, it opens the secrets of a relationship with the Most High.

[Guest]

I am non-superstitious.

[Perd Hapley]

Fig,

That ain't quite enough for me.  If folks like Lewis and McDowell can't put a good case together that demonstrates beyond reasonable doubt that Christ is God, and that the Bible is his inherent word, then I will go my own way.  I am a Christian because I know Christ and I have seen His work in the life of others and in my own.  But I'm not satisfied with my own experience and feelings.  If I thought the Christian faith was just something that felt true, it would be something the principles of which I could pick and choose from.  I must know it is true.

grampster,

Other religions DO NOT point to Christ.  They point you to yourself, and tell you what YOU can do to go to heaven, to be at peace with the universe, to be resolved into the still waters of Nirvana, what-have-you.  Christianity tells of One who has done for us.

[280plus]

There's a lot to consider here so for now all I can say is "WOW!" and thank you all for the time, effort and thought you have put into your posts. Time for bed!

[Perd Hapley]

Hunter Rose,

I do not intend to insult you for the God or the Divine you believe in, but I must conclude from your last post that he is a sad failure.  At 0 A.D. he feels the world is "somewhat stagnant" and that "mankind seems to be in something of a rut"?  So his divine answer is a "new philosophical idea"?  Of course many historians have opined that Christianity had a positive effect on the world, but surely this is a pretty weak solution for a divine being.  

I suppose his next idea was to give a revelation to Muhammed, so that he could declare all Christians and Jews as enemies, or at least infidels, and then lead a bunch of Arab tribes on the warpath.  Hadn't he tried that already with the twelve tribes of Israel?  Similar outline: divine revelation, followed by military conquest of heathen territory (Christian and Pagan territory, with Jews intermixed) .

Later, he tells Joseph Smith to rewrite Christ's ontology and origin, and declare all Christian churchs apostate.  What did this accomplish?  Polygamy?  Getting young men to dress neatly, with nice haircuts, and walk around my neighborhood telling folks they can have their own planets?

Gerald Gardener comes up with another "new way". It's called "Wicca"

If you believe, as you say, that Gardener came up with it, then I wonder how it can be on the same level as the religion taught by Christ, whom you spoke of as God's personal avatar.  Or was Garderner also indwelt by the divine presence?  Or does that matter?

What I find interesting about all of the religions addressed above, is their lack of documentary, archeological and historical corroboration, compared to Biblical Christianity.  In other words, I don't know what assurance anyone has that these other faiths are the real deal.

WAY too many people are caught up in the conceit of "one true way"

And WAY too many people are caught up in the conceit of pretended humility and false open-mindedness.  I would like to know what is conceited about the belief that God revealed Himself and His way to salvation through one set of writings, one tradition, one religion.  Does the gentleman wish to say that God is conceited?

[grampster]

fistful,

If that is what you got from what I wrote, then forgive my inability to be clear.  I am saying that Jesus is Lord, but he may reveal himself in diferent ways at different times ands in a different fashion.   As was said by another more connected than I, (paraphrased) Can the clay ask the potter why he forms the clay as he does?  At some point in the "Religion of What Can I Do" one may come to the conclusion that the answer is nothing.

[Perd Hapley]

What I mean to say is that you are putting pressure on Stand_waite because if he does not agree with you and take back his words, he is a big meanie.

280plus, let me try again.  I'm telling you that anytime you disagree with someone on an issue like religion or politics, it has consequences.  Just like with the other side of the gun rights debate.  We believe they are increasing crime and forcing people to be victims.  They may not like to hear that about themselves, but we can't escape that conclusion.  Feelings will be hurt, I'm afraid.

[Strings]

>I suppose his next idea was to give a revelation to Muhammed, so that he could declare all Christians and Jews as enemies, or at least infidels, and then lead a bunch of Arab tribes on the warpath.  Hadn't he tried that already with the twelve tribes of Israel?  Similar outline: divine revelation, followed by military conquest of heathen territory (Christian and Pagan territory, with Jews intermixed) .<

*sigh*

Try reading the Koran before generalizing that way. Unfortunately, EVERY religion (with the possible exception of Budhism) has been twisted by man to serve his own ends at some point: right now, Islam is going through such a twist...

 My point with my last post was to suggest a possibility that there is a way of reconciling my beliefs with yours. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be: which is fine, nobody gets hurt either way...