[Tj3]

Cred, I think it depends on who joins in the discussion. There are usually only a handful of die hard Christians that won't accept anyone elses beliefs but their own.

Bingo! That was my point.

You don't accept my beliefs - why do you insist that I must accept yours?

The question of the thread was:

"Why can't people of different faiths accept one another?"

To accept another person does not mean that we must accept their beliefs. This is a critical thing for all people to understand if we are to have a peaceful harmonious society. This may be seen as a doctrine of unity, but forcing everyone to accept everyone else's beliefs is actual an intolerant position because it denies the right to those who disagree to hold to other beliefs.

Rather, our position should be to accept the RIGHT for everyone to believe as they do, why accepting the RIGHT of everyone any who chooses to do so, to disagree.

[marriaget]

I'll answer the basic question. If people didn't say oh YES there IS a god! Jesus did do this! This this is real! Yes yes! Fact true! Your wrong! Then it would be easy. Sadly, people insist their religion is correct and true and there is indeed a God. This is your religion, and your BELIEF. It's what you BELIEVE, please don't insist you're right. Simply say I BELIEVE. Not THERE IS a God. Wrong, and it hurts other people. That's that.

[Tj3]

This is your religion, and your BELIEF. It's what you BELIEVE, please don't insist you're right. Simply say I BELIEVE. Not THERE IS a God. Wrong, and it hurts other people. That's that.

Interesting. If we say that there is a God, somehow that "hurts" you because you believe that there is not a God.

But denying us the right to say that there is a God is okay?

How is that "tolerance"?

[KBC]

Interesting. If we say that there is a God, somehow that "hurts" you because you believe that there is not a God.

But denying us the right to say that there is a God is okay?

How is that "tolerance"?

Where does this poster say she is tolerant?

She never stated that and now you are bringing a new idea into a place where there isn't one.

[Tj3]

Where does this poster say she is tolerant?

she never stated that and now you are bringing a new idea into a place where there isn't one.

Agreed. Good point.

[xxariesxx]

Hurray for this thread Alty :)

I was raised a Christian (Lutheran) here in the Midwest. My mother was Catholic but took on my dad's Lutheran side when they married. I was always involved in the church until a few years ago. I went to Bible camp for many years, taught Sunday school and Bible School in the summer, volunteered for communion, was an acolyte, played bells in the bell choir, sang in the choir.
I prayed all of the time, in school, driving, with friends, always before going to sleep at night.

Then a few years ago I just stopped and thought about it. I don't even remember why, maybe it was because of losing many familiars from moving away, traveling, I had to look in myself with a new perspective. With that perspective I realized I don't believe in religion. I was never angry or upset with God or the religion in general. I have always had a good life and been very lucky.
Little about following religion made sense to me, and the fact that that wasn't upsetting proved to me that it was a part of my life I felt like I didn't need anymore.

I'm still really young; I don't claim to have a lot of life experience. I don't have a lot of answers, I have an open mind, and like to hear what anyone has to say about the subject.

[Alty]

Wow a lot of posts while I was on the phone. :)

Bsd_detector, I'm in Alberta too, very close to Edmonton. Thank you for sharing your story. :)

KBC, Osama Bin Laden, nope, don't accept his faith because it teaches that death is okay, to kill others for your own power is okay. That's not okay.

For me, if you're a good person then I don't care what you're faith is, but if you're a bad person I also don't care what your faith is. ;)

It does hurt when people put down your beliefs. I do agree that everyone has the right to believe whatever they wish, I don't begrudge anyone that right. It's funny that a lot of other people say that, but when you enter into a discussion with them then they start telling you that your religion is wrong, that you are wrong, that you must believe what they believe in order to be right.

I've never said that my way is the only way, my way is one of many, all I'm looking for is acceptance of my beliefs, that's all, I'm not asking you to believe what I believe.

There is more than one way to believe in God, and there are many other ways that don't even include God. If we could just accept each other and our different beliefs, really, it would be a better world.

Yup, if I ran for the Miss Canada pageant I'd ask for "world peace". ;)

Let's keep this discussion positive, I know we can do it if we all try. Let's be respectful of eachothers beliefs, give it a try, we might be surprised at the outcome.

Maybe, just maybe, we can start that peace I was talking about. :)

[Alty]

xxariesxx, gosh, that's a mouthful, we're going to have to find you a nickname. ;)

Thank you for sharing your story. It's funny, but I noticed that a lot of Atheists started as Christians and then decided that it wasn't for them.

Also, most people who are now Atheists didn't leave the church or Christianity because they were angry at God, but simply because what they were being taught didn't hold water with them.

That's exactly how I feel about the bible, and organized religion. I believe that the bible was written by men, fallible men. The bible is a good book, it has many interesting stories, and maybe there is some truth to the stories, but for me, there's more fiction than non-fiction. I don't think the bible is the "word of God".

So, after deciding that, I realized that going to church to hear a man preach to me about the writings from a man made book, well, that didn't make any sense.

Yes, the way I was treated in school and at church had a lot to do with it too, but not as much as some people seem to think.

So, I believe in God, but because I don't believe in the bible or church, many Christians deny me the right to say that I believe in the same God that they do. That definitely hurts.

I'm glad you came here. I hope that we can all discuss our beliefs openly, honestly and without any prejudice. :)

[Tj3]

That's exactly how I feel about the bible, and organized religion. I believe that the bible was written by men, fallible men.

I am glad that you said that is a belief, and you are welcome to that belief, but the evidence shows something quite different.

[xxariesxx]

Hehe.. well just aries is fine, or "you" works too :D

I agree about the bible. It has many inspiring and useful passages, as any self help book would, but I don't believe it as being the "word of God" either. One thing I cannot understand is why is it such a source of dependence when only selective passages are followed while others are looked over? If the bible is the word of God and it should be followed exactly, why only follow certain parts? I'm honestly asking anyone because I'd like to know.

I can understand you'd be hurt by being told you can't believe in the same God as Christians. I would think if there is a God he/she would be above petty particulars and not be so picky about how you choose to believe in him/her.

(Adding this in: I really don't want to offend anyone, and if I do it is unintentional; just for future reference :) )

[Tj3]

One thing I cannot understand is why is it such a source of dependence when only selective passages are followed while others are looked over? If the bible is the word of God and it should be followed exactly, why only follow certain parts? I'm honestly asking anyone because I'd like to know.

That is a good question and often a valid criticism.

I am willing to stand on the whole word of God because I believe that it is the word of God, have the evidence that it is, and am willing to put my whole faith in what God has to say. I hold to the whole Bible as my sole standard of doctrine.

I know many Christians who take the same stand.

[Alty]

I am glad that you said that is a belief, and you are welcome to that belief, but the evidence shows something quite different.

Tom, I really don't want to get into this with you again. I can't make that determination because I haven't seen any evidence to prove that the bible is the "word of God'. Until I see proof I will follow my belief.

Please, lets just discuss our differing views. If you want to add this proof as part of your explanation as to why you believe what you believe then fine, but I don't want this to turn into another confrontation and name calling episode. Can we agree to that?

I'm putting out an olive branch Tom, I'll leave the rest to you.

[Tj3]

Tom, I really don't want to get into this with you again. I can't make that determination because I haven't seen any evidence to prove that the bible is the "word of God'. Until I see proof I will follow my belief.

You refused to consider the evidence when it was offered.

Please, lets just discuss our differing views.

I am always willing to do so. Just please accept the fact that other may disagree with you, and be prepared to accept that if you challenge my faith and my beliefs, that I am prepared to defend those beliefs, and yes, I may say things which disagree with what you want to believe. Accept the fact that disagreement is not a personal offence.

If you want to add this proof as part of your explanation as to why you believe what you believe then fine, but I don't want this to turn into another confrontation and name calling episode. Can we agree to that?

Well, Alty, I did not engage in any name-calling, so I am and always have been willing to discuss respectfully.

[Alty]

Originally Posted by xxariesxx
One thing I cannot understand is why is it such a source of dependence when only selective passages are followed while others are looked over? If the bible is the word of God and it should be followed exactly, why only follow certain parts? I'm honestly asking anyone because I'd like to know.

I would like to know the answer to that as well.

Maybe it's a lot like the dictionary, we don't use every word in the dictionary, we, as humans, never will, there are too many words in the english language to learn every single one.

So maybe the Christians just pick the passages that are the most common, or make the most sense in their every day lives.

That's just a guess though.

[xxariesxx]

That is a good question and often a valid criticism.

I am willing to stand on the whole word of God because I believe that it is the word of God, have the evidence that it is, and am willing to put my whole faith in what god has to say. I hold to the whole Bible as my sole standard of doctrine.

I see. I was meaning I wonder why some bible passages are followed so strictly while others are dismissed. Personally perhaps you don't do this, I am only talking in general.

For example homosexuality (not to open that can of worms, just a short example) - it is constantly quoted as being unacceptable in the bible. But in the bible it is also all right to stone your daughter, yet never today would any Christian quote that to defend someone who hurt their girl.

It seems like it means the bible can be adapted to any current political or cultural situation rather than completely followed in its entirety as a holy book should be?

[Tj3]

I would like to know the answer to that as well.

Maybe it's alot like the dictionary, we don't use every word in the dictionary, we, as humans, never will, there are too many words in the english language to learn every single one.

So maybe the Christians just pick the passages that are the most common, or make the most sense in their every day lives.

That's just a guess though.

As I said in a previous post, that is a good question and often a valid criticism.

I am willing to stand on the whole word of God because I believe that it is the word of God, have the evidence that it is, and am willing to put my whole faith in what God has to say. I hold to the whole Bible as my sole standard of doctrine.

I know many Christians who take the same stand.

Thus though this is often a valid criticism, it is wrong to generalize and paint all who profess to be Christian with the same brush.

[Alty]

You refused to consider the evidence when it was offered

Really, let's not start that again. This is a new thread, perhaps it's time to leave the past behind us and move forward. I am being sincere Tom, I'm willing to meet you half way, you have to walk the other half.

I am always willing to do so. Just please accept the fact that other may disagree with you, and be prepared to accept that if you challenge my faith and my beliefs, that I am prepared to defend those beliefs, and yes, I may say things which disagree with what you want to believe. Accept the fact that disagreement is not a personal offence.

I don't mind people disagreeing with me, it only hurts when I'm told that my faith isn't good enough. I don't think you'd like it if I said that to you. You can disagree with my beliefs, just don't belittle them. That's all I ask.

Well, Alty, I did not engage in any name-calling, so I am and always have been willing to discuss respectfully.

Like I said, let's let by-gones be by-gones, I have no desire to start an argument.

I know we won't agree, pretty much on everything, but that doesn't mean that we can't discuss. Who knows, maybe we'll learn something from each other. :)

[xxariesxx]

So maybe the Christians just pick the passages that are the most common, or make the most sense in their every day lives.

I like this answer. I suppose I was talking much too specifically before, but this makes a lot sense in general

[Alty]

I see. I was meaning I wonder why some bible passages are followed so strictly while others are dismissed. Personally perhaps you don't do this, I am only talking in general.

For example homosexuality (not to open that can of worms, just a short example) - it is constantly quoted as being unacceptable in the bible. But in the bible it is also alright to stone your daughter, yet never today would any Christian quote that to defend someone who hurt their girl.

It seems like it means the bible can be adapted to any current political or cultural situation rather than completely followed in its entirety as a holy book should be?

And that is my major problem with the bible.

I do believe that most people read the bible, pick what is pertinent to their faith and leave the unpleasant passages alone.

I have asked about this before but the question has always been sidestepped or I've been told that those passages don't exist or I read it wrong.

Stoning your daughter is stoning your daughter, there is only one way to read that, and by anyone's standard today, it's wrong.

[Tj3]

I see. I was meaning I wonder why some bible passages are followed so strictly while others are dismissed. Personally perhaps you don't do this, I am only talking in general.

As I just said to Alty, generalizing in this case, as in most cases is a wrong approach. While it is often true, and often a valid criticism, many Christians do believe the Bible is full.

For example homosexuality (not to open that can of worms, just a short example) - it is constantly quoted as being unacceptable in the bible. But in the bible it is also all right to stone your daughter, yet never today would any Christian quote that to defend someone who hurt their girl.

Let's not get back on these old stale claims of contradictions. There was just a thread on that, I have seen the list on internet, and have wasted far too much time in showing what the context of the passages are, which are more often than not, saying the opposite of the claim.

These are easily addressed by simply following this approach:

1) Read the context of the chapter (vast majority refuted by reading one verse before and after the quoted verse) At least 95-99% of all these claims are refuted by doing this simple step.

2) Recognize that contradictions in fact only exist when the two verses are completely incompatible (mutually exclusive)

3) Unclear verses must be interpreted in the light of those are clear (i.e. often a verse or partial verse is taken out of context and not considered in light of explicit teachings in scripture)

4) Rare cases require additional study in the larger context of scripture, or the original culture/languages of the Bible. The Bible was not penned in English but in Koine Greek and Ancient Hebrew. As in any case where one translates a text, especially from a precise language such as Greek to a less precise language such as English, some clarity is lost and to see the original intent, we need to look at what was said in the original language.

5) Often one book gives part of the story and another gives a different part. They are complementary, not contradictory

It seems like it means the bible can be adapted to any current political or cultural situation rather than completely followed in its entirety as a holy book should be?

That is exactly where we get false teachings and cults from. People failing to consider the whole of scripture. That is why scripture itself warns strongly against such a practice.