The Religion Discussion

[d spike]

^^Spikey, I really dont know where u get the motivation to continue this argument with this twat na.

I used to read this, Bluefete's "God" thread, in amazement (while not the most accurate word, that's the most polite word I can use to describe how I felt), but I never even wished to voice an opinion. This decision was based on my experiences regarding discussions amongst differing faiths. While it sounds like a good idea to compare differences, observe similarities, and generally learn of different ways of looking at the same thing, this never works for religion, unless the persons involved share a strong sense of trust, respect, wisdom and maturity - as well as a very good grasp of language.
Thus it is that whenever average people discuss religion (especially Christianity) it soon turns into either a competition, an evangelistic affair, or a fight - or all three, in that order.
But then someone I know, who is fed up of the nonsense that passes for the fundamentalist view on Tuner, started a 'religiously-themed' thread just to see how foolish these goodly folk could get - and lad, did they ever.
Then I realised that the only view representing those who consider the teachings of the Christ more than just interesting, were a handful of blinded literalists whose only knowledge of scripture was what they were fed.

And here was my conundrum: When I read Bluefete's thread, I was quite certain the spouted nonsense I came across was precisely that - because of what I knew. Suppose I didn't know... then my assumption would be that despite whatever sense Jesus' words might make, his followers are all complete imbeciles. If a drink has a magnificent bouquet, but all who drink it go mad - then bet your last cent I ain't tasting it.
And so I decided (against the better judgment of most of my peers) to attempt to be the voice of reason - not for the benefit of Bluefete, or Sir Civic, or this Megadoc1... but for the curiously minded who might otherwise shy away from delving into what could result in a better understanding of why we all are here.

It brings me no comfort to know that there are creatures like you out there, pretending to know God and foisting your second-hand beliefs that you don't even fully understand (stories and lessons half-heard and badly told) on others, mainly doing this in an attempt to salve your insecurities and low self-esteem, only succeeding in scaring away people from a deeper understanding of reality. For this reason, I carry on (not for your benefit, for you have made it clear that you are incapable of learning - you never took my advice about studying your faith properly, did you?) but for the sake of younger folks who might be reading your colossally nonsensical rantings and mistake them for the product of a truly christian mind.

megadoc, everyone reading this realizes that you are being infantile, at best, or bordering on insane, at worst.
Ever since you started trying to refute and nullify my statements in the other thread, you have made it very clear that you do not understand basic logic (on which all arguments, including religious ones, are founded); your grasp of Christianity is the little scraps you gathered in haste to shield yourself from some occultist crap you got yourself involved while screwing around (I get you'll refute that too, huh?); your use of language is pathetic; and you lack any sense of common courtesy.

I have told you time and again, I have no problem with anyone's beliefs - it's their cramming it down the throats of others that I refuse to accept.

I guess you can't remember this, can you?

...it's a case of getting you to realize that your dogmatic fundamentalism blinds you to the truth of Jesus' teachings: one of brotherhood, forgiveness and love. You deny these truths, conveniently quoting the hellfire n' damnation stuff... any part of scripture that promotes your "us" versus "them" football-match style of religion... ignoring the pivotal/focal points of those same scriptures...

You really think that I don't know what you're attempting to do?
I will not be baited.

Ever since we crossed paths, you keep going on and on about the knowledge and intellect that you presume I possess (I often wonder why you are so hung up about it)...
...you want nothing more than for me to side with you against the 'heathens and non-believers' in your glorious football-match style of religion, and it annoys the hell out of you that I don't...
you are upset that I do not come here to give the 'heathens and non-believers' a massive blow-out...
... it irks you that someone like me with all my (how was it you put it?) "high knowledge and logic" refuses to see the point of sitting on the same bench with you...

And this is what truly has been bugging you all this time!

The other thing that bugs poor ole megadoc about me is that I won't come out and spew my beliefs on this forum.
My claim that my own religion is my own business rattles him no end.
Simply because I refuse to admit or deny in an anonymous yet public forum is not proof of anything except my appreciation for privacy.

The problem fundamentalist Christians have with the debate of salvation (faith vs. works/charity) is that to believe in the possibility of good works acquiring merit, would then negate their stance on salvation ‘through faith alone’. For them to therefore assume that charity is worth anything is dangerous. Thus, they claim that only the ‘saved’ benefit from doing charity – an obviously self-nullifying statement, for if one is saved, then why the need for good works? (How they wish Luther was able to rid them of St. James’ letter!) So they come up with these convoluted explanations (in order to rid themselves of his arguments) of what they say he meant to say... yet these fly in the face of what St. James was saying quite clearly!

True enough... but you are not in that category... not by a long shot...

Even folks who thought they were following Christ, and just made complete fools of themselves and their fellow Christians, were put to death (found what they were looking for, I presume)... the clowns, for example, who interrupted a procession of Venus in Rome in which the Emperor's niece was present, tearing down banners and garlands, breaking the statue of Venus, with cries of "Woe!" and "Repent!"... the Emperor's Guard responded by later locking them inside the house they met in, and burning it to the ground.

...but you are not in that category either...

No one is persecuting you for your belief in Christ. You were being mocked for your blind, deaf and dotish attitude (your inability to interact efficiently with others) not your belief. And what you received here isn't PERSECUTION, my soft-skinned friend. Ridicule isn't persecution by any stretch of the imagination. If you want to know what persecution is, go ask a Holocaust survivor.

You weren't paying attention in Sunday school class when they explained all the stuff you eventually got wrong, were you? No, you were too busy day-dreaming about how you would post up wonderfully literate and concise writings on the internet...

[Kasey]

R'amen

[sMASH]

hoss, my head huttin tryin to figure out what mega on about now. all i could see is that spike showing him that the bible has errors and that complete acceptance is not advisable. i was attempting to show that very much earlier,


mega, accept that the bible has errors, and simple errors, and move on,,, oh gosh man. no body tellin u not to follow it, juss do so with a pinch of salt and a lil bit of honesty.


it is my personal belief that part of the wildness of a christian's belief is because of the words they use and the way in which they use them. they don't use simple normal words with concepts easy to follow, is always 'do u know the lord' and u need to be edified, and walkin in faith. like what does walking in faith mean?

they use vague ambiguous terms. the normel people get their own interpretation and every body goes along for the ride, each with their own belief. when they regurgitate the same sayings back to the group at a group meeting, every one shows mutual praise and acceptance because they used the same vague ambiguous terms as was used before.

like 'convict the man of sin' and 'give spiritual gifts', and to 'be witness to his awesomeness'. i doubt every one who uses them know exactly what the first person to use them actually means. each person uses them in the same kind of situation they heard it in the last time, and regurgitate it back for the support and encouragement of the group. the emotions at the time prevents any one from asking ' u know what the f#$% u mean when u say that?'

but the charade of understanding has a momentum of its own, and nobody asks why, but just goes along with the flow. and every one believes in those things, and invents new weird english ambiguous terms. its a style now, and no body bats an eye. and so they believe their own crap.

the one which started this with me when i was really small was 'anointing'. going to church and watching tv when i was small u hear that this anointing went on, and so-and-so was anointed. but knowing the term used in the dictionary was to dab, or pour oil on ur head, that got me cornfused. cornfused because the people made such a big deal about the act or procedure of putting oil on sumone's head and i not seeing any oil or hearing any mention of it.

then it had communion. u eat sumting that is a cross between a roti and a potato chip, and drink grape juice. i did not know why it was called communion, but i did like roti and juice, so the people could sing and clap how much the want behind me.

about ten years ago i heard on tv some preacher saying that god is wrapped in mysteries, and around one mystery is another mystery, and that we don't know what the mysteries are... and u have to use the shrilly nearly yodeling voice when u saying mysteries and stretch it like hagee does. i was like, 'wtf u talkin bout dude?' before 'wtf' was even a term used. every one in the congregation sang and clapped, and went along with it, but nobody had any confusion about what he meant, and then i realized, they baffle themselves with thier own bullsh!t, and don't question the collective. they just let the emotion roll.

[d spike]

hoss, my head huttin tryin to figure out what mega on about now. all i could see is that spike showing him that the bible has errors and that complete acceptance is not advisable. i was attempting to show that very much earlier,


mega, accept that the bible has errors, and simple errors, and move on,,, oh gosh man. no body tellin u not to follow it, juss do so with a pinch of salt and a lil bit of honesty.


it is my personal belief that part of the wildness of a christian's belief is because of the words they use and the way in which they use them.

I agree with much of what you said in the rest of your post. It seems that importance is stressed on the "right" jargon, rather than understanding... but then faith is based on acceptance, not understanding. It is up to the believer to use his faith and the other gifts God gave him, such as intellect, to understand.
I don't have the time at this point to discuss the rest of your post - and something tells me that particular umbrage-filled voices certainly will - and I will address them as soon as I return.

However, I never said

that complete acceptance is not advisable

Acceptance of scriptures, meaning agreeing that it is inspired writings, is part of the religion. There is a vast difference between "acceptance" and claiming that one must take the Bible literally - fundamentalists, by the very nature of their rationale, claim that both ideas are the same.

no body tellin u not to follow it, juss do so with a pinch of salt and a lil bit of honesty.

A pinch of salt is NOT required... unless you believe literally everything you read. The Bible is a collection of writings. Some were historical in nature, some were simply stories meant to teach a point.
When Jesus spoke of the mustard seed, one could haggle over the fact that it isn't the smallest seed there is, or the fact that it only grows into a shrub, not a tree. Or one could try to see what he was trying to say.
To argue about whether Jonah really existed (it's a folktale, deal with it) and if a whale could actually swallow a person, has absolutely nothing to do with what the story was trying to teach.
To put it simply:
Aesop's fables. Does the fact that animals cannot speak lessen or negate what the fables meant to teach?

Cheers

[MG Man]

***hears the clickety-clack of eyboards as the young'uns google Aesop***

[JoeBama]

Praise Ye Jah!!

[d spike]

Anyone read that full page article on pg 17 in today's express?

A priest who saw heaven, hell, and purgatory - The death experience of Father Jose Maniyangat

Purgatory

After the visit to hell, my Guardian Angel escorted me to purgatory.
Here too, there are seven degrees of suffering and unquenchable fire. But it is
far less intense than hell and there was neither quarreling nor fighting.




The main suffering of these souls is their separation from God. Some of those
who are in purgatory committed numerous mortal sins, but they were reconciled
with God before their death. Even though these souls are suffering, they enjoy
peace and the knowledge that one day they will see God face to face.

I had a chance to communicate with the souls in purgatory. They asked me
to pray for them and to tell the people to pray for them as well, so they can
go to heaven quickly. When we pray for these souls, we will receive their
gratitude through their prayers, and once they enter heaven, their prayers
become even more meritorious.

I have always found the concept of Purgatory intriguing. It is an example of logical thinking. (Luther, however, found the concept disturbing - mainly because of the simony that was taking place at the time concerning "indulgences" ("timeouts" from Purgatory that were being sold at the time) - which was why he found it needful to toss the Second Book of Maccabees out of the Bible.

Here is an earlier post of mine on the topic of Purgatory:

...is the eternal part that bothers me. is either u go to heaven or to hell, and both are eternal. but the fact of the matter is that there are many gray areas, where people believe in god and make mistakes, but some mistakes are not as easily forgiven and some are but a purposely done.

I know only the basics of Islam, as my focus always was elsewhere, so please tell me if I am wrong about this statement:
Don't Muslims believe that their concept of hell is a temporary place of punishment for some, eternal for others? Sinful believers who go to hell, will eventually be removed after suffering for a while and taken to heaven, and those who reject God will remain there eternally?

I always thought that was a remarkable belief, as it mirrors a similar belief of early Christians, as well as Jews and Messianics, that God will show mercy to worthy sinners after death.
The Jews have a tradition of praying for their dead, so that the souls would be freed from their painful state of purification, and sooner sent on their journey to God.
One biblical reference to this was in the deuterocanonical "Second book of the Maccabees", where we are told that the prayers for the dead help free them from sin.
Luther didn't care for this book, as he was trying to stop the sale of "instant" prayers for the dead (called "indulgences"), so this was one of the books he tossed into the refuse pile, refusing to accept it as "inspired" writings.

Early Christians also prayed for the dead. One inscription from A.D. 190 says: "Abercius by name, I am a disciple of the chaste shepherd...He taught me…faithful writings...These words, I, Abercius, standing by, ordered to be inscribed. In truth, I was in the course of my seventy-second year. Let him who understands and believes this pray for Abercius."

Origen, in A.D. 244, and Tertullian, in A.D. 210 both wrote about, and strongly recommended praying for the dead.
In an apocryphal story called "The Acts of Paul and Thecla", written in A.D. 160, a character is asked to pray for a dead person, so that the deceased may be "transferred to the place of the just".

There are actually parts of the New Testament that reflect this ancient belief shared by early Christians that there is forgiveness beyond the grave - bearing in mind that Christians believe once you end up in hell, you stay there.
In St. Matthew's Gospel, Jesus says, “And anyone who says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but no one who speaks against the Holy Spirit will be forgiven either in this world or in the next.” Jesus' words clearly shows that there is forgiveness after death. The phrase “in the next” (from the Greek “en to mellonti”) generally refers to the afterlife. Why specify a lack of "forgiveness" for certain sins there? Unless forgiveness is offered there for others, one must suppose.
In St. Luke's Gospel, Jesus speaks figuratively about the final judgment, saying when the Master comes (at the end of time), some will receive light or heavy beatings but they will live. This state is not heaven or hell, because in heaven there is no punishment, and in hell no one will be "living with the Master".
In Paul's first letter to the Corinthians, Paul mentions people being baptized on behalf of the dead, in the context of atoning for their sins (people are baptized on the dead’s behalf so the dead can be raised). These dead people cannot be in heaven because they are still with sin, but they also cannot be in hell because then their sins could no longer be atoned for.
In Paul's second letter to Timothy, Onesiphorus is dead but Paul asks for mercy on him.
In Hebrews, the spirits of just men who died in godliness are "made" perfect.

Of course, the Catholics go to town on this belief that worthy sinners can be cleansed after death, making them pure to enter heaven, even giving it a name coined in the eleventh or twelfth century, Purgatory.
The Eastern Church, while it agrees with the concept of a state of cleansing for the soul after death, doesn't agree on the concept of an actual laundry.
While good old Luther tossed out the concept of "Purgatory", the Lutheran Church does see the need to pray for the dead.
On the other hand, while present-day Methodists don't believe in any such thing, John Wesley, the founder of Methodism, believed in an intermediate state between death and the final judgment and in the possibility of "continuing to grow in holiness there".

So, Smash, I think that there is a part of the Big Man's design, that will be able to assist those that strive to do what is right. For we all are human and not perfect.
Christianity teaches that God accepts the human condition, and whatever efforts on our part are made, are sanctified and made perfect by him.
Fundamentalists won't approve of anything I have said here, but that won't change the fact that these things were said and done long before the originators of their tithe-collecting institutions got the brainwave to strike out on their own, in order to stop Daddy from hogging all the business.

Cheers

[d spike]

I met him in a back alley............I stabbed him and he died.........

for those who missed page 1

Indeed... for those who missed page 1:

Anyone willing to share an experience that happened to you that convinced you that God is real?

Isn't it amazing that this simple query on September 05, 2009 could have spawned a thread of over 260 pages long?
What is even more amazing is that it took almost two years (up until Jul 31, 2011) for the OP to get it right... he edited this simple question a total of 12 times!

While it could be argued that an effort has as yet to be made to answer the OP's question, such an argument would be made void by the realization of the simple truth that even the OP has not paid attention to his own theme, but rather, chooses to use the thread as a coat-hanger on which to drape colourful and irrelevant media clips.

Looking back, one realizes that the same arguments resurface over time, with multiple "believers" (many of whom clearly don't believe in acquiring a sound education, considering their posts) chastising those they consider to be "unbelievers", with the same arguments, over and over again... like some horrid online tag-team wrestling experiment gone wrong...

With theories, scriptures, pseudo-science, and even utter nonsense have we been showered... Darwin and Mohammed, Jesus and Campins... Plenty mention of "atheists" has been made, and little of "agnostics" - which makes you wonder, as most declared atheists are actually agnostics...

Remarkably enough, a few holy rollers considered me an unbeliever, simply because I did not behave in the manner they did... and whether I am or not is simply not important.
I am against ignorance, self-imposed blindness, and antagonistic/misanthropic systems of belief that parade as religion.

Seeing that no one has responded to this thread for a while, perhaps it is safe to assume that most feel that whatever relevant topics exist must have been thoroughly beaten out, and this thread will then be allowed to rest among all the other worn-out threads - until yet another fanatic, oozing religion at the ears, decides to poke fun at Darwin and the monkeys... or Daily Mail publishes some nonsense that catches Bluefete's eye.

With this in mind, I will just recall some statements of mine:

To believe in personal salvation is all well and good, but that cannot be the be-all-and-end-all of your religion... The mantra of "I am saved!" cannot be the focal point of the human relationship with the Creator - this is a very selfish viewpoint. To have a "personal relationship with God" is a good thing, but we were put here as a people, to achieve something as a people. (One reason why suicide is wrong.) Life is beautiful, but too short for an individual to achieve God's plan (if there is one) on his own. We each go through life, meeting far too many individuals, to interact fully with each... far too many problems and ills exist for any one of us to deal with - alone. We can run to a "God" for solace, but in every example of this, we are told that the answer lies within us as a people. We are "Christ" to each other - or whatever you want to call it.

We are called as a people to achieve something wonderful, over time (hence the reason for procreation) and this is what was meant for us.
The world isn't going to end in a fit of God's anger and frustration with our inability to do what's right (that would mean the Devil won and God failed, wouldn't it?) but when we succeed in doing our part in the Great Scheme of things/"God's plan".

dspike what is the purpose of creation?? is it not to worship???

Most Christians should view 'worship' as the simple and true answer to this question, but it isn't really complete - as the concept of 'worship' differs. 'Worship' can easily be seen as meaning the joyous (and sometimes cacophonous) shouting and singing one sees being 'performed'... but this is just a very small part (and optional) part of what 'worship' is.
If you give a young lad a bicycle, you would be rather upset if he never rides it. We were placed here among the Creation, to be part of it. One can worship the Creator by enjoying his Creation! (To further illustrate the point I wish to make: If you had a pretty wife, how would you show her every night how glad you were to be her husband? )
So if you think about it, those who enjoy life to the fullest, and revel in their existence, are worshiping God. (They, in some way, have clearly understood PART of why we are here - and they will discover more as they journey through life... BUT IN THEIR OWN TIME.
You need to ask yourself (NOT other people... Megadoc1 had it wrong from the starting line) if you believe Someone is in charge of this whole affair. If your answer is 'yes', then you need to trust that he has a plan - and you do your part. (Meddling in his affairs by messing with other people's lives isn't your part. To explain: we are all called to walk a path. Each of us has our own path. To stop walking in order to start directing traffic, or to go and drag people off their path to walk alongside you, may not be the best thing for that person.)

Now the worship of the Creator by man is of three basic types: individual, communal and universal. Individual worship is self-explanatory, as is communal. Universal worship (can't remember the proper scholastic term, but bear with me and my failing mind) concerns the Creator's plan for us, and is the main reason for our creation. We were brought into being - whether created in an instant, or brought into creation over a period of time (evolved?), is neither here nor there - as a race that propagates itself, and hands down knowledge across generations. This has to be for a reason. We are meant to achieve something... something good and wonderful... so wonderful, that everyone will be aware of it and its meaning... and the role the Creator played in all time. This is the plan. Its achievement will be the glory of our race, and to the greater glory of him who made us, and gave us the gifts to achieve. All will realize... "Every knee shall bow and every tongue confess..." (Unfortunately, many people see the end of our time here as cataclysmic - thanks to the apocalyptic idiom used by the Jews - and a sort of 'victory dance' for "us" to do over the defeated "them".)

You were asked to do this by witnessing. It is unfortunate that folks think witnessing means talking and preaching - far from it. Witnessing means to live your life in such a way, that what you believe is seen in what you do. Gandhi said, "I like your Christ, but I do not like your Christians." This was exactly what he was referring to. Remember this: 'What you are doing is speaking so loudly that I cannot hear what you say.'

Don't make the mistake of "judging others". Instead, say, "If I were like that and didn't change, I believe I would have a special place in hell." Reserve your ability to judge for yourself and your own actions - that is what it's for. Directing it outward warps it's ability to do good and to better oneself.

The problem with faith is understanding it. Like everything else we have, it can grow, or diminish. Though faith seems to grow with application (will explain this) it isn't a muscle that grows DUE to flexing - a mistaken belief held by many, not just fundamentalists. Faith's seeming growth through application actually takes place due to consideration/reflection of past actions and consequences (the use of critical and analytical thinking)... NOT to the application itself - hence its direct link to human logic and intelligence.

Here is where fundamentalists part ways with reality. Faith grows with doubt. Only when you question, when you ask 'why', can your faith truly develop as the answer becomes apparent. The answer may take years, decades... but that is part of your journey. Sometimes, a negative answer seems to diminish or eradicate what faith is there, but that is not so. To search is to find... to find is to continue looking. That is our nature.
Fundamentalists refute this. Faith to them is the opposite of doubt - to doubt is to fail, to fall... To be totally adamant allows presumption to rear its head in your life, accompanied by blindedness.
Faith is not the roadway... it's the light you use to see your way more clearly.

You know what I have found to be rather alarming? That there are people who will agree that each of us is unique... they will state that everyone is quite different... they will denounce organized religion for lumping humanity together... expound on the virtue of personal interpretation of scriptures... prate on about having Jesus as your personal saviour, and the importance of having a personal relationship with him...

...and then turn around and tell you that their perspective is THE right one... their interpretation of a book combined of many books, written by many different people from many different walks of life, spanning centuries, from differing cultures, different languages each with its own idioms, translated through different languages - sometimes by amateur translators who didn't fully understand the lingo - full of conflicting ideals and concepts, is THE proper interpretation...

Cheers

[rspann]

dspike,does it make a difference where,how and with whom, you take part in communal worship?,and if so, please explain.

[d spike]

dspike,does it make a difference where,how and with whom, you take part in communal worship?,and if so, please explain.

Forgive me if I don’t answer this query with a simple answer such as:
“Yes, it does. Come to the large tent by me on Sunday… remember to walk with tithes.”

This question has many facets, and before I deal with any of them, let me mention (again):

I have clearly stated that all persons will have their 'bias', due to personality, culture, upbringing, experiences, and so forth. Our personal choices are truly our own when we make them based on our exposure, experiences and learning. "To thine own self be true". The sign of maturity is in using one's own bias to judge what is right for oneself, but not letting it cloud one's judgment of others.

With this in mind, let me begin by answering the first question, “Does it make a difference where…?”
Assuming you are referring to a choice of religion, this is actually two questions:
“Does it make a difference (for someone else)…?”
“Does it make a difference (for me)…?”
Considering what was said in the quote above, the first question is easy: “No.”
The second question requires more introspection. You have to judge for yourself what is best for you. Believe it or not, maturity’s different levels have different correct answers.

Maturity is different things… dependency, for example. Living in your paranoid, controlling parents’ house at the age of 43, allows you a lot less room for free decision-making than living on your own in an apartment at 27.

Whether we like it or not, religion is tied to culture. (Luckily for us in sweet Trinidad, the mish-mash of cultures makes the acceptance of a variance of religious beliefs relatively easy.)
To choose a religion that falls outside of your community’s culture could easily add undue stress to your life, as well as to the lives of those around you. Is this worth it? (Of course, the members of your new-found faith will tell you “Yes, suffering is part of the Journey” and other such hollow phrases – they don’t have to live with you and deal with the hostility and stress!)
Think of it! Is it really worth something in your drawing closer to the divine? Is it acceptable to you, in your attempting to truly appreciate the source of peace and love, to antagonize all those closest to you?
I know of quite a few sad cases (multiple choices of religions too) and most of them ended in misery for all concerned.
(Being a missionary in a foreign country is a totally different thing altogether. Such a person needs to be quite mature and clear-sighted – not attributes of many folks today – and has to make sure he does not inflict his religion on others, but draws them to it by his actions.)
If you believe in the Divine, then you would believe that He can reach you wherever you are.
If you think it is His will that you walk a different path to those around you, then you probably will… perhaps now is not the best time for that choice, that’s all.

As social beings, we worship together… on of the greater tragedies of our pluralistic society is that many leave their resident community to go elsewhere to worship. This does nothing to build the fabric that holds us together, but actually assists in fragmenting our society.
If you are born into a family that shares a common belief, then what is wrong with following such a path? If you are a Muslim in a Muslim community, then you are supported by your neighbours and your friends in working together to make here a better place – provided, of course, that they think as you do.
I am not talking about situations where people are false in the upholding of their beliefs – that is an entirely different thing. The rain is always wet – but if you stay inside, you stay dry… buying the medicine will not make you get better – you have to take the dose. Claiming to adhere to a religion, and actually practicing it, are two different things.

“Does it make a difference how and with whom…?”
In following one’s chosen religion, one will be guided accordingly as to the “how”. Worshipping as a community helps bind that community closer together, and strengthens its ideals. It makes sense to assist in this process by taking part in the manner that form of worship advises.

The unspoken question that arises out of your query is:
“Is it all right then to take part in other religions’ worship?”
Again, that depends wholly on your level of maturity. Some religions (or rather, some of their adherents) seem antagonistic towards other religions.
To be blunt, if you are still in a formative stage, then it might not be a good idea… unless the worship ceremony is a celebratory or functional one, such as a wedding or a funeral.
The best way to get a proper answer is to ask your mentor in the religion that you follow. He would know better (and thus give a clearer answer) as he would be aware of what you believe, the worship you wish to attend, and the level you are at spiritually.

This question of yours is based on a major issue:
Religion and Truth.
If there is One Truth (as so many claim) then shouldn’t there be only One Right Religion?

I agree that there is one Truth, but where that one truth is concerned, there are many ways of perceiving it, expressing it, focusing on different aspects of it... and when you consider that all or some of this must be put into the context of the culture of the one who proclaims it... no wonder the multiplicity of religions in the history of man.

A truly religious person would believe this. However the problem with appreciating/accepting other cultures' religions starts right as one accepts this truth, and at the same time, allows one's own personal view to colour this same truth.

Who you deem God (and thus, His revealed "word") can easily lead you to assume that you (and hence your choice) are right... and all else must therefore be wrong. It hardly ever occurs to the immature/simple mind that God would choose to reveal himself to different cultures across time in ways that those particular people could understand and would accept His truths.

Please note that I am not decrying immature or simple-minded folk - far from it... Their lives are far more uncomplicated. It is what we do, not what we know, that we will be judged by - if you believe in some form of judgment, of course. In fact, to be aware of more, makes whatever judgment you might face even more weighty. Simple people see things in "black and white". Decisions come easily to them... until they come across one of life's quagmires of moral dilemmas. (At that point, they either become aware of the existence of the "gray areas" of life - and in choosing to deal with it, open their minds to the ability to learn more deeply about life; or they prefer to remain as they are by "backpedalling" until they reach to safe ground, then avoid that particular reality like the plague - or just live in denial.)
Where these simple folk run afoul is when they decide that everybody else must do things / accept truths their way - as any other way must be wrong.

There are those that yowl about what the scriptures say and don’t say… as though this is the be-all–and-end-all of religion… Is it?

After all, if writing scripture was the most important thing the disciples could do, then most of them failed miserably. (Jesus should have picked a bunch of scholars instead of a gang of fishermen - in which case, thank goodness for Matthew.)
Peter wrote two letters and dictated a gospel (Mark was his secretary), Matthew wrote a gospel, John wrote a gospel and some letters (let us not forget Revelation! without which many small churches would simply be charitable organizations), and James and Jude each wrote a letter... Poor lads, what a let-down... Thank goodness for educated late-comers like Doctor Luke and Saul, Paul, whatever...
Also, if writings are THAT all-important, then why did the Good Lord only allow a handful to survive?

But seriously, when one weighs the information, values, ideas and ideals (instructions, yeah that too) brought forward from that time regarding what Jesus said and did, one sees a very clear thread: that of the importance of loving one another. Folks can (and have, and most likely, always will) quibble about what may or may not have been said or done, and whose belief is superior... but the bottom line for those who believe in a "heaven" is what do you need to get there?

One of the most important statements of Jesus is "I am the way, the truth and the life, no one can come to the Father except through me."
Christians hold onto this statement like a banner at a football match, waving it in the face of non-Christians ("we win! we win! we win!") when it actually means something far, far different, far more all-encompassing than the seemingly literal meaning of in-the-name-of Jesus-I-going-heaven stuff (taking scripture literally ALWAYS is a path of head-butting walls and stump-toe... but that's for another time).
Be rational. Jesus ain't no road... and literally going through someone isn't particularly pleasant... so obviously, Jesus was referring to following his teachings about himself - the path he laid out for us, goes to the Father. When we try to look at who Jesus is, he keeps showing us a concept, that of love. "He who loves me, obeys my commandments", "Love one another...", "Whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers, that you do unto me" and so forth.
Therefore, the path to God is through love. Doesn't matter what you call it, where you worship, (if you perform 'communal worship'), what name you call him by...
(Talk about discrimination! You claim he is the God of all men, yet you demand that he only be referred to by one name which came out of one culture among many?)

Do you really think that God, if he exists, bothers about what name you call him, if he loves you? I thought the whole point of monotheism is that there is only one Boss? A name only makes sense to us creatures, as it differentiates one from another. (When Moses asked his name, God put him in his place: "I am who is" - take dat in yuh waist, yuh too dam farse an outta place...)

The point of our existence here may very well be to learn to care for one another... one big, ant farm experiment to prove that love is supreme... In which case, even whether you believe in God or not is not really important - as the movie "Legion" showed, it's far more important that He believes in us... and our ability to love... to pick ourselves up from the mistakes that we make, to heal, to forgive... and to continue, striving in this reality to make the choices that we will be rewarded for in the next, and make this place a better place to live in, despite the turmoil, the earthquakes, the idiots, and the over-multiplicity of choices of underwear.

Cheers

[Kasey]

dat was well gee'd.

[rspann]

dspike.if you open a church ,I joining for sure.What you said above is where I am right now.I born and grow in the adventist church(40 something years)and a few years ago,when I stopped studying the doctrines and their beliefs,and started studying the bible and reading a lot I realized I was on the wrong thing all the time.I eventually gave up on going to church,and would stay home and study instead.I realize now, the things that I told people(witnessing)was totally wrong,but I am over all that now.

[sMASH]

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^ the guy who was guiding her with what to say for her to accept Islam, he hugged her after?!
I take it they are related? perhaps it's her father? If not, isn't that not allowed?

[MG Man]

does it matter?
what is the point of that vid?

[Chimera]

anyone here read the earth chronicles by Zecharia Sitchin?

saw it mentioned on Ancient Aliens and considering buying the set

[d spike]

does it matter?
what is the point of that vid?

MG, what are those videos about?

[MG Man]

didnt look a the 1st one
2nd one isa CNN story on an american woman who converted to islam after 911..........yippie

[sMASH]

ah shucks, u can't see vids. is just to harass u a bit. one a conversion vid and the other is some people interpreting some early jesus stuff as him not being divine.

about worshiping in community, islamic custom is to not pass one mosque to worship at another. in other words, keep to your localized community first. one of the purposes of the friday prayers is to maintain links with the wider islamic community.
the giving of charity happens with the neighbors first, regardless of religion. it is said that if one goes to sleep content when their neighbor goes hungry, is not a muslim. u may think that is just to be a good sharing person, but it would entail that u know and interact and encourage some level of mutual trust and confidence with your neighbor to be privy to such information.

but even with so much consideration of the world and the things in it is made important, what is also taught is that this world is just the means, the means to an end. so, in practising this religion, one should not be ashamed of it, or of standing out. mind u your not to be imposing on other people, but still keep the articles of conduct. it must be mentioned that islam makes recognition of the various degrees of bravado of humans. it is said if some one encounters something wrong, one should work to correct it, if one cannot do something to change it one should speak out against it, and if u can't do that, then u should at least keep the belief that the action was wrong, and that just keeping the belief is the lowest form of faith.

[MG Man]

sMASH, what's your take on the stone in the kabba (sp) at Mecca?
u really think it's a piece of heaven?
meteorite seems more likely............and seriously.............the way muslims forever condemning rituals, idolatry etc, I was surprised you guize try to touch / kiss the stone
huh

[meccalli]

Sitchin has some great material, has alot to do with the work of the angel-hybrids in that pre-flood time.

[d spike]

2nd one isa CNN story on an american woman who converted to islam after 911..........yippie

Well, considering all the American hype that took place after 9/11, I suppose that in itself is a miracle...

ah shucks, u can't see vids. is just to harass u a bit.

Yeah, us old, blind codgers... harass us with some written material instead. The last time I sat around that long waiting for something to open and reveal something interesting, I got in plenty of hot water with the police and the over-protective parents of a rather young nubile exhibitionist... but enough ancient history...

...the other is some people interpreting some early jesus stuff as him not being divine.

This is no doubt some re-dredged material, as this argument is almost as old (but not as old!) as Christianity itself. The same old stories get dug up, only to be thoroughly explained (but as you know, explanations are always ignored by those they are directed to - take megadoc, for example)... and later to be exhumed once more and dusted off by some wet-behind-the-ears fanatical anti-Christian...
The bottom line about Jesus' supposed divinity is hinged on what really were the beliefs of the apostles and their followers between the time of Jesus' death and Constantinople "legitimizing" Christianity around 300 AD.
All those who perpetually raise these arguments cannot deal with one major fact:
Jesus was crucified because the Jewish leaders accused him of claiming to be God - a fact he never denied. In fact, all of his disciples, except one, were executed refusing to deny this belief as well.
Did your video deal with this point? I would love to know if a new approach is being attempted...

about worshiping in community, islamic custom is to not pass one mosque to worship at another. in other words, keep to your localized community first. one of the purposes of the friday prayers is to maintain links with the wider islamic community.
the giving of charity happens with the neighbors first, regardless of religion. it is said that if one goes to sleep content when their neighbor goes hungry, is not a muslim. u may think that is just to be a good sharing person, but it would entail that u know and interact and encourage some level of mutual trust and confidence with your neighbor to be privy to such information...

...it is said if some one encounters something wrong, one should work to correct it, if one cannot do something to change it one should speak out against it, and if u can't do that, then u should at least keep the belief that the action was wrong, and that just keeping the belief is the lowest form of faith.

Most commendable!

[dtp]

sMASH, what's your take on the stone in the kabba (sp) at Mecca?
u really think it's a piece of heaven?
meteorite seems more likely............and seriously.............the way muslims forever condemning rituals, idolatry etc, I was surprised you guize try to touch / kiss the stone
huh

yes its a gateway

[d spike]

sMASH, what's your take on the stone in the kabba (sp) at Mecca?
u really think it's a piece of heaven?
meteorite seems more likely............and seriously.............the way muslims forever condemning rituals, idolatry etc, I was surprised you guize try to touch / kiss the stone
huh

yes its a gateway

A gateway to what?

[Kasey]

i cant make out what is the stone. Is it that round black area inside the silver thingy?

[d spike]

sMASH, what's your take on the stone in the kabba (sp) at Mecca?
u really think it's a piece of heaven?
meteorite seems more likely............and seriously.............the way muslims forever condemning rituals, idolatry etc, I was surprised you guize try to touch / kiss the stone
huh

From Wikipedia:

Muslim pilgrims jostle for a chance to kiss the Black Stone; if they are unable to kiss the stone because of the crowds, they can point towards the stone on each circuit with their right hand. In each complete circuit a person says "In the name of God, God is Great, God is Great, God is Great and praise be to God". Once people have kissed the stone a guard stands ready to push them away.

These stories are interesting:

The Stone has suffered desecration and significant damage over the centuries. It is said to have been struck and smashed to pieces by a stone fired from a catapult during the Umayyad siege of Mecca in 756. The fragments were rejoined by 'Abd Allah ibn Zubayr using a silver ligament. In January 930 it was stolen by the Qarmatians, who carried the Black Stone away to their base in Hajar (modern Bahrain). According to Ottoman historian Qutb al-Din, writing in 1857, Qarmatian leader Abu Tahir al-Qarmati set the Black Stone up in his own mosque, the Masjid al-Dirar, with the intention of redirecting the Hajj away from Mecca. However, this failed, and pilgrims continued to venerate the spot where the Black Stone had been.

According to historian Al-Juwayni, the Stone was returned twenty-three years later, in 952. The Qarmatians held the Black Stone for ransom, and forced the Abbasids to pay a huge sum for its return. It was wrapped in a sack and thrown into the Friday Mosque of Kufa, accompanied by a note saying "By command we took it, and by command we have brought it back." Its abduction and removal caused further damage, breaking the stone into seven pieces. Its abductor, Abu Tahir, is said to have met a terrible fate; according to Qutb al-Din, "the filthy Abu Tahir was afflicted with a gangrenous sore, his flesh was eaten away by worms, and he died a most terrible death."

The Stone has been subjected to other indignities during its history. In the 11th century, a man allegedly sent by the Fatimid Caliph Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah attempted to smash the Black Stone, but was killed on the spot, having caused only slight damage. In 1674, according to Johann Ludwig Burckhardt, someone smeared the Black Stone with excrement so that "every one who kissed it retired with a sullied beard".

In recent years, however, literalist views of the Black Stone have emerged. A small minority accepts as literally true an allegorical hadith which asserts that "the Stone will appear on the Day of Judgement (Qiyamah) with eyes to see and a tongue to speak, and give evidence in favor of all who kissed it in true devotion, but speak out against whoever indulged in gossip or profane conversations during his circumambulation of the Kaaba".

[MG Man]

and here I though tit was the hindus who worshiped stones
huh

[Dizzy28]

and here I thought it was the hindus who worshiped stones
huh

^ Interesting.

[d spike]

dspike.if you open a church ,I joining for sure.

I hope you're joking here, lad. This is one of the major problems with western religion - everybody who gets some insight into their own faith, immediately rushes off to form their own "church"... What people fail to realize is that whatever group they belonged to that assisted them in their spiritual growth, is responsible for the outcome of that growth... unless, of course, as in your case, you grow to realize that your original group is in error.

What you said above is where I am right now.I born and grow in the adventist church(40 something years)and a few years ago,when I stopped studying the doctrines and their beliefs,and started studying the bible and reading a lot I realized I was on the wrong thing all the time.I eventually gave up on going to church,and would stay home and study instead.I realize now, the things that I told people(witnessing)was totally wrong

Unfortunately, yes. I agree with you that the SDA church is in error, but I won't dwell on that here. You are certainly old enough to appreciate what I will say at this point:
People make the mistake of thinking that the proper way to live life is to be free of error - but this is a fantastic utopian ideal that has no link to reality. Discovering errors and correcting them is the best way to learn. In learning concepts, we have to identify the non-criteria (an intellectual way of saying, "this is not it... this is not it, either...") for if we knew the criteria already then the concept would have been known already as well!
Take for example, the early Christian church's way of agreeing exactly who and what Jesus the Christ was. It took a heap of heresies that they had to endure, before they fine-tuned their doctrine - for it was thanks to those very same errant beliefs which assisted them in agreeing on the "non-criteria", and thus helped them to better form the way to state their belief!
Another way of looking at it is to ask someone to describe a spirit. They will tell you everything it is NOT (a spirit has no form, no colour, no...)
So you are not "lost". You just have a clearer idea of where you do not want to be. As Edison said, when told by a depressed assistant that their latest test in the search for the correct material to serve as the filament in the incandescent light-bulb was their 2000th failure, "Then we know 2000 items that won't work..." That narrows it down, does it not?

but I am over all that now.

This is good, as it is very easy to one to wallow in spite and self-pity, instead of moving on.

I now understand your query about communal worship.
In your case there is nothing wrong with attending any group that attracts you - just ask yourself why the attraction exists.
If it is because the tithe-basket is not as stuffed as the bearers would prefer, then that is the wrong reason.
I always advise "seekers" to visit the place of worship of a close friend whose qualities they admire. Friends tend to be open about themselves, so you would know whether it is just a pious facade they use or if it is real. If it is real, it had to come from somewhere, and their spiritual base is worth checking out.

St Augustine said that to be searching for God is to find Him, and to find Him is to be forever searching for Him.
Good luck!

[megadoc1]

hey d spike! today I think I saw you "bonding" with Betsy on mucurapo road
I was gonna stop by and say hello but .......I think I saw you with a tire iron in your hand lol


anyways, whats that "evill" looking thing on your bonnet?