Usurping the authority of your religious tome

[Gadget (fmr Marine)]

I am not a religious person, but I wonder about those who are, that seek to "over-step" the literal or interpreted meaning of the "sacred" book they hold in such high regard.

Does overstepping the "rules" of the book, in what amounts to a personal campaign, in the name of your god, for what you deem as a noble cause, undermine the purpose of following your savior?

[avatar4321]

forgive me, but i dont have a clue what you are asking. Could you clarify what you mean in any way?

[Gadget (fmr Marine)]

forgive me, but i dont have a clue what you are asking. Could you clarify what you mean in any way?

There are countless examples of religion being hijacked for personal use....I guess I am wondering how one who is held in high regard in a certain religion (nationally or internationally) can selectively chose what to believe, and still maintain credibility within that religion.

♠

[Abbey Marie]

There are countless examples of religion being hijacked for personal use....I guess I am wondering how one who is held in high regard in a certain religion (nationally or internationally) can selectively chose what to believe, and still maintain credibility within that religion.

♠

If you are talking about what I think you are:

Picking and choosing which parts of the Bible to believe has always seemed self-serving and ludicrous to me. Why would someone wholeheartedly believe one part, and not another? What makes someone think they have the wisdom tomake such distinctions in the first place? I would assume the same goes for other holy books.

[avatar4321]

You basically are asking by what authority people practice cafeteria religions essentially, correct?

I've never understood how someone can claim to believe a religion and not believe it all. Either it's of God or its not. Either you are trying to do God's will or you're not. There isn't alot of ambiguity there.

Much the same is I don't understand how people can try to claim that all religions are correct when they contradict. I think it ignores reality. I think we should respect each others point of view, but i don't see a point pretending as though we don't think our religious views are correct to pretend we arent being "self-righteous". It's absurd because no honest and thinking person would hold to religious views they didn't believe were accurate and if they are accurate, then obviously someone's views who contradict are not.

However, I do also believe that the Holy Ghost can teach people the truth of all principles. Not everyone learns every principle at the same rate so the Spirit will teach as we are ready. Unfortunately sometimes, human nature being the way it is, we tend to fill in areas we dont understand with our own thoughts and confuse them with the Spiritual revelations we've actually had.

[Abbey Marie]

...
However, I do also believe that the Holy Ghost can teach people the truth of all principles. Not everyone learns every principle at the same rate so the Spirit will teach as we are ready. Unfortunately sometimes, human nature being the way it is, we tend to fill in areas we dont understand with our own thoughts and confuse them with the Spiritual revelations we've actually had.

:clap:

[Gadget (fmr Marine)]

If you are talking about what I think you are:

Picking and choosing which parts of the Bible to believe has always seemed self-serving and ludicrous to me. Why would someone wholeheartedly believe one part, and not another? What makes someone think they have the wisdom to make such distinctions in the first place? I would assume the same goes for other holy books.

Perhaps you might know what I am talking about.....but being vague, nonetheless.....

If spun correctly, couldn't such information be used to undermine the person's credibility in the religious community, they claim to serve? Isn't it in the best interest of those that believe the holy word to excommunicate or distance themselves from such a person?

[Abbey Marie]

Perhaps you might know what I am talking about.....but being vague, nonetheless.....

If spun correctly, couldn't such information be used to undermine the person's credibility in the religious community, they claim to serve? Isn't it in the best interest of those that believe the holy word to excommunicate or distance themselves from such a person?

Depending on how off-base that person was, I suppose it could be warranted. If it was a difference in interpretation about a minor matter, it's probably not worth getting upset about. But, for example, if someone were to believe that the Quran requires jihad/terrorism towards non-Islamists, and it in fact doesn't require it, that person and their beliefs should be publicly denounced by Quran scholars.

[Gadget (fmr Marine)]

Depending on how off-base that person was, I suppose it could be warranted. If it was a difference in interpretation about a minor matter, it's probably not worth getting upset about. But, for example, if someone were to believe that the Quran requires jihad/terrorism towards non-Islamists, and it in fact doesn't require it, that person and their beliefs should be publicly denounced by Quran scholars.

Or, perhaps that person called for the killing of people of his own religion, because HE thought they were in violation of their holy scripture.....????

[avatar4321]

Or, perhaps that person called for the killing of people of his own religion, because HE thought they were in violation of their holy scripture.....????

I think that can happen when people exalt the scripture above the God who revealed it. When they focus more on the interpretation of passages than the God who inspired the passages they are likely to begin relying on their own mental facilties to interpret rather than the Holy Spirit. When that happens who knows what people will come away with.

[DragonStryk72]

I am not a religious person, but I wonder about those who are, that seek to "over-step" the literal or interpreted meaning of the "sacred" book they hold in such high regard.

Does overstepping the "rules" of the book, in what amounts to a personal campaign, in the name of your god, for what you deem as a noble cause, undermine the purpose of following your savior?

I always just imagine Jesus is standing up there in heaven, screaming, "I DID NOT SAY THAT!!!!"

In more direct answer, the people who manipulate the dogma of their religion to suit their needs, whether they realize it or not, are doing to so avoid personal responsibility for their own actions. Jesus said, "Love Your enemy", but the people who tear down gays use leviticus to say they are righteous in their anger, even though later, in Corinthians, Paul himself says that we are no longer under the Law (referred to formally as Leviticus) since the time of John the Baptist. But the thing you'll find in every religion, there is one universal line that I love, which follows the general idea of Socrates, "The only true wisdom comes in knowing that you know nothing". Every single religion states that you cannot know God, Allah, Yahweh, or any other central universal power. All of these religions also almost expressly forbids the very actions many carry out "in the name of god".

The big problem though, is that every religion says that theirs is right, and the others are wrong. I thin Dogma, the movie, applies here, "They are all too self righteous". Christianity as a religion, even being my religion, isn't perfect, and there are many interpretations I can make, but I choose to follow the precept that I can't possibly know all ends, and that, since I can't, then in general, it's probably better to err on the side of forgiveness.

[avatar4321]

I always just imagine Jesus is standing up there in heaven, screaming, "I DID NOT SAY THAT!!!!"

In more direct answer, the people who manipulate the dogma of their religion to suit their needs, whether they realize it or not, are doing to so avoid personal responsibility for their own actions. Jesus said, "Love Your enemy", but the people who tear down gays use leviticus to say they are righteous in their anger, even though later, in Corinthians, Paul himself says that we are no longer under the Law (referred to formally as Leviticus) since the time of John the Baptist. But the thing you'll find in every religion, there is one universal line that I love, which follows the general idea of Socrates, "The only true wisdom comes in knowing that you know nothing". Every single religion states that you cannot know God, Allah, Yahweh, or any other central universal power. All of these religions also almost expressly forbids the very actions many carry out "in the name of god".

The big problem though, is that every religion says that theirs is right, and the others are wrong. I thin Dogma, the movie, applies here, "They are all too self righteous". Christianity as a religion, even being my religion, isn't perfect, and there are many interpretations I can make, but I choose to follow the precept that I can't possibly know all ends, and that, since I can't, then in general, it's probably better to err on the side of forgiveness.

Where on earth does Christianity state that you cannot know God? That's directly contrary to every principle of the Gospel I can concieve of.

[DragonStryk72]

Where on earth does Christianity state that you cannot know God? That's directly contrary to every principle of the Gospel I can concieve of.

alright, what is God thinking right now?

[avatar4321]

alright, what is God thinking right now?

That it would be nice if His children listened.