Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   This belief thing
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(1)
Message 4 of 162 (782564)
04-26-2016 4:45 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Tangle
04-26-2016 12:13 AM


I'll crawl out from under my rock to get bashed as usual, because I have to tell you what the Bible says about all this, which apparently you don't know.
The Bible presents itself clearly as the revelation of the one true Creator God who was forgotten about when Satan succeeded in seducing the first human beings away from Him. Humanity lost spiritual contact with God as a result, and became subject to death.
Many of the human tribes after that had their own "gods" who were really Satan's own horde of fallen angels, or demons. All these religions make carved idols to represent their demon gods. The Bible talks about the foolishess of carving a god out of a tree and bowing down to it when the true God is invisible and everywhere.* That's what all the statues all over Asia represent. These gods like to make human beings bow down to them and worship them, because that is Satan's deepest desire, to be taken for God. The gods demanded all sorts of sacrifices, even including human sacrifice and the sacrifice of children, which even God's chosen people the Israelites practiced when they got seduced into following the gods of the heathen tribes around them. All that is in the Bible. These gods also made sex acts in the temples, both hetero and homosexual, part of "worship." This was still going on in Corinth when Paul preached there. It may still be going on in some places.
So the true God in mercy chose various men to learn about Him and write down the truth about Him, which became the Bible. He also made His own tribe of worshippers from the descendants of Abraham. He also promised to send a Savior who would take away the sins that keep human beings in bondage to the demon "gods" -- saving all who believe on Him from Satan's snare and from Hell where Satan causes people to go who follow him instead of the true God.
That Savior was promised to Adam and Eve and the promise was kept down the ages. It is a thread that runs through the entire Bible. There were always some who had kept the truth alive despite the proliferation of the demon religions. Job knew the true God for instance, and then God made it more explicit when He chose Abraham, whose descendants became the preservers of that promise.
Finally the Savior came, to Abraham's descendants, from the line of David, which God had promised to David. Many of the Jews accepted Him but many had been corrupted by false doctrine and rejected Him, so God gave the Savior to all the peoples of the world.
It took hold strongly in Europe, displacing all the European heathen gods. It was also corrupted by the Roman church though true believers continued down the centuries.
Yes, it's quite a story. No other religion has any such story. Modern western society is rejecting all gods these days although that really means Satan rules them if you understand these things. And other parts of the world still have their own gods that continue to demand various kinds of propitiations and offer various kinds of blessings in exchange for being worshipped. Only the Bible claims to present the Creator God and offer salvation from bondage to the demon gods.
There you have it.
Cheers.
*This is of course why the Ten Commandments include the prohibition against "graven images"
Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them:
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Tangle, posted 04-26-2016 12:13 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Genomicus, posted 04-26-2016 6:47 AM Faith has replied
 Message 6 by Admin, posted 04-26-2016 7:17 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 16 by Tangle, posted 04-26-2016 10:50 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 10 of 162 (782580)
04-26-2016 9:42 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Genomicus
04-26-2016 6:47 AM


No, the Bible presents itself clearly as a spirited (and largely successful) effort of a patriarchal dominator culture to ideologically eradicate the more peaceful, egalitarian, and goddess-worshipping cultural fabric which existed among our Paleolithic ancestors.
I believe I described accurately how the Bible PRESENTS itself. You seem to have read some kind of modern antibiblical propaganda, perhaps you could give your source? As I understand it the Middle Eastern cultures were all patriarchal.
The practice of widespread religious human sacrifice emerged only after violence-based patriarchal social systems emerged in Mesopotamia and surrounding regions. The Bible is largely responsible for fueling the rise of violent patriarchies (through its ideological destruction of the more egalitarian and peaceful spirituality of societies existing thousands of years before the Bible was ever written), and is thus partially responsible for the emergence of human sacrifice as a religiously-sanctioned ritual.
Again, your source? Perhaps a Marxist college course?
I fail to see how the Bible could have "fueled" anything in the Middle East since all of it that existed when the Israelites entered Canaan would have been the five books of Moses.
Human sacrifice was common in the Middle East, and Abraham's being called to supposedly sacrifice his son Isaac was a response to it. It was the Canaanite god Molech that demanded child sacrifice, that even the Israelites sacrificed to, that brought God's punishment against them.
There were only two attacks commanded by God, and their purpose was judgment against the peoples invaded. When the Israelites deserved judgment, for such things as sacrificing their children to the god Molech among others, God sent the Babylonians and Assyrians against them.
Also, human sacrifice is understood to have been a distorted understanding of the promise of a Savior that was given as early as Eden, and repeated through Noah and his descendants. Many of the idolatrous religions contained distorted elements of the promise of a Savior. All peoples would have known about the promise of a Savior of course, from their ancestors on the ark, just as they all knew about the Flood and preserved that knowledge in all cultures in various distorted forms.
Please produce your sources for the "peaceful agrarian" peoples and all the rest of your claims. I presented the outline of the Bible, I can quote it on any particular statement I made, if you like.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Genomicus, posted 04-26-2016 6:47 AM Genomicus has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(1)
Message 12 of 162 (782582)
04-26-2016 9:53 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Dogmafood
04-26-2016 8:52 AM


Re: Side Effect of Curiosity
The one consistency seems to be that every culture does it. We all imagine some sort of higher order and that propensity for superstition is leveraged to enforce and enshrine behaviour.
You don't like it, obviously, but the Bible does give an extremely coherent consistent understanding of the thousands of idolatrous religions, which I outlined in my post. They are the reason God gave us the Bible, to show us the true God and set us free from the demons who are the gods of all those religions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Dogmafood, posted 04-26-2016 8:52 AM Dogmafood has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by jar, posted 04-26-2016 10:11 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 14 of 162 (782587)
04-26-2016 10:19 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by jar
04-26-2016 9:02 AM


Faith writes:
The Bible presents itself clearly as the revelation of the one true Creator God who was forgotten about when Satan succeeded in seducing the first human beings away from Him.
Of course as usual Faith that is simply NOT what the Bible story actually says.
Over and over the Bible presents God as THE true Creator God, also presents accounts of various heathen peoples recognizing Him as the true God. Rahab for instance recognized Him. His having been forgotten about is evidenced in the thousands of idolatrous religions that the Bible was written to expose and oppose.
There is no mention of Satan in Genesis 2&3 and the serpent does not seduce anyone away from God and the people in the myth do not forget about God and in fact continue on with a relationship over many generations.
The Bible is to be read as a whole, all its parts illuminating all its other parts. We are told in Revelation that the serpent in Eden was Satan, and there are passages in Ezekiel and Isaiah that theologians understand to be Satan's history, because they clearly describe some kind of supernatural being although they start out talking about a human that is understood to have followed Satan.
Adam and Eve were seduced away from God to the extent of losing their intimate fellowship with Him and being cast out of Eden. The true God was remembered by them nevertheless and they had faith in the promise of the Savior. He was also remembered by the patriarchs of the Seth line to Noah too, and others after the Flood such as Job. However, most of the world followed the demon religions. Even Abraham's family kept carved idols and had to be weaned away from them to the true God.
Second Islam and Judaism also make exactly the same claims and even about exactly the same God.
Well, Judaism is of course based on the Bible which teaches of the true God. They have a distorted idea of some of it but they do have the same God. Islam took a lot from the Old Testament because Mohammed had some knowledge of the OT, even copied out a lot of the book of Isaiah into his Koran, which would account for the similarity there, although "Allah" is not God's name, that name and most of the Koran came from the local traditions. Allah had been one of the hundreds of idols until Mohammed elevated him to the stature of the one God and kicked out all the others. Anyway, of course one would expect some similarities there, though quite limited if you're reading Islam honestly.
Third, many religions present themselves as the revelation of the one true Creator God and at least one that is far older than either Judaism, Christianity or Islam even explains why you might think such things.
I referenced the Bible, period. Perhaps you could give your sources for your claim here? You certainly can't find any that give the history of idolatrous religions as Satanic inventions that oppose the true God, or the promise of a Savior who would take away our sins.
All of the Gods as well as this universe are simply manifestations of Brahma's dreams. As happens in dreams, subjects and even characters change and morph as the dream progresses. There is evidence for that in the Bible stories where the God character does change and morph; the god of Genesis 1 entirely different than the bumbling fearful god of Genesis 2&3 and unlike the god in Exodus who changes Pharaohs mind and the punishes Pharaoh just to show off.
The Hindu Brahma gives a Hindu idea of the hundreds of Hindu gods still worshipped in India. The God of the Bible is clearly presented, on the other hand, as the one true Creator God who is above all the lesser gods, doesn't treat them as dreams but as demons, created angels that became corrupt and followed Satan, and He is always presented as never changing His mind though sometimes as seeming to in order for human beings to understand Him better. Brahma seems to be a Hindu recognition of the true God, but it is a very vague recognition and obviously full of fanciful ideas such as this dream idea.
Religions are simply the product of man and the gods that are created in those religions are also simply the product of man.
You may believe whatever you want, but the Bible presents a God who created us and everything else that exists, not the other way around, and also created the angels who fell and became the demons that claim to be gods.
That does not mean that there might not actually be a GOD but if that GOD does exist it will be totally unlike any of the God(s) and god(s) we create.
Which is exactly what the Bible says about God, and the whole purpose of the Bible is to reveal to us the true God who is above all things and not at all like any of the other gods, even beyond our comprehension.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by jar, posted 04-26-2016 9:02 AM jar has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 15 of 162 (782588)
04-26-2016 10:21 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by jar
04-26-2016 10:11 AM


Re: Side Effect of Curiosity
Where does the Koran describe the idolatrous religions? They are exposed throughout the Bible, and Allah is one of them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by jar, posted 04-26-2016 10:11 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by jar, posted 04-26-2016 11:08 AM Faith has replied
 Message 29 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-26-2016 11:37 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 17 of 162 (782595)
04-26-2016 10:57 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Tangle
04-26-2016 10:50 AM


Sure it does. Exactly as do all the rest.
They actually do not. The Bible is absolutely unique.
What claims would you like to compare? I'll quote the Bible, you quote from whatever.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Tangle, posted 04-26-2016 10:50 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Admin, posted 04-26-2016 11:05 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 30 by Tangle, posted 04-27-2016 1:45 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(1)
Message 20 of 162 (782600)
04-26-2016 11:20 AM


the nature of belief
The only meaningful response to the OP that I can see is to give the Bible's revelatory overview of how all the religions came about, which I did.
If the topic is the nature of belief, I don't think it can be discussed meaningfully outside that context.
It would boil down in most cases to 1) just accepting what you were taught as a child and shaping your life accordingly.
2) There are also those who have personally experienced the spiritual realities behind the various religions, however, which puts their belief on the foundation of experience.
3) Christians regard their belief as a gift from God: God's opening our eyes to the truth. Evidence of believing the truth is such things as loving God's law, which fallen humanity can't do.
I don't think there's much else to the question of the nature of belief.

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by vimesey, posted 04-26-2016 12:15 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 22 of 162 (782608)
04-26-2016 12:57 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by vimesey
04-26-2016 12:15 PM


Re: the nature of belief
I understand your point of view, as someone of faith. For you, the question is indeed a little circular. For you, God exists, and so belief follows naturally.
Well, remember that I was an unbeliever for most of my life. I began to believe in supernatural things in my mid-forties, and became a Christian a few years after that. Until then, belief was incomprehensible to me.
The theories people have about it didn't convince me then and they don't convince me now. If I had a theory myself, at least in some vague and unarticulated sense, I think it would have involved assuming that people have had some experience that convinced them. I knew a lot of people into New Age beliefs and sometimes envied them. I thought they were irrational and that such things were destroying western civilization, but at the same time I envied whatever experience it was that gave them this sense of another world or a higher consciousness or whatever it was.
The idea that one could come to believe in God by reading the Bible would never have occurred to me. First I read a lot of books about religion. That went on for a couple of years until I was persuaded to Christianity, knew I was a Christian and that the Bible was God's revelation.
To me that was and is a rational belief. It is based on the testimony of witnesses to actual historical occurrences, including miraculous occurrences, it isn't about something that goes on completely inside a person as so much of it always seemed to be understood. I did have such experiences, however, mostly in the phase where I believed in the supernatural but not yet in Christ. Most of them were scary. I could say I learned about the reality of the demonic before I learned about salvation, and it can be dangerous for it to happen in that order. I then found out that a lot of people who were into New Age beliefs, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc., had such experiences too.
Tangle of course, is coming at it from a non-believer's angle, and from that perspective, the question is much more interesting - why do so many people turn to scientifically unevidenced beliefs, of such variety -
Since you say "turn to" I'll assume you mean they didn't believe and then something happened that caused them to believe? Rather than simply growing up in a belief system? How about what I've said above as descriptions of ways it may happen -- through some kind of supernatural experience being one way, and through believing the testimonies in the written Bible as another. Both those ways do involve evidence by the way. I don't think anybody really believes anything without evidence.
and (for me) why is it that they care so much about other people's beliefs that they can get downright hostile towards them - even kill them for having a different belief.
I think this is a garbled misunderstanding of something that you'd need to be more specific about.
I think it's deeper than a simple manifestation of tribalism - I think that there are aspects of belief of such comfort in a harsh, ephemeral and potentially meaningless existence, that a belief system can be vitally important in allowing people to cope with life.
In my experience and observation, that's never the reason anyone comes to a religious belief, that's some kind of interpretation imposed on it by unbelievers. I don't doubt that comfort may be found in some systems of belief, but I don't think that's ever the reason a person becomes a believer in the first place.
So vital, in fact, that they can be prepared to kill someone if they don't share that belief system - they can't accept any threat to it.
I believe this too is a false interpretation that comes from the point of view of an unbeliever but perhaps you just need to be more specific so I'll know what you have in mind.
As I say, I know that you have a different perspective Faith - but if you're able to accept (temporarily and purely as an artificial premise for the sake of argument) that beliefs originate from people's own minds, then the question of why is an interesting and quite wide ranging one.
I've tried to give my view of it here, so you'll have to tell me how it fits with what you are saying.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by vimesey, posted 04-26-2016 12:15 PM vimesey has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 25 of 162 (782624)
04-26-2016 5:22 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Coyote
04-26-2016 3:47 PM


Re: Heinlein quote
I don't see any relevance in your quote to this thread, certainly not to anything I said. I explicitly said that in my experience comfort has nothing to do with why people start believing in a religion, and I also said nothing about faith in a "proposition." But perhaps you were just talking to yourself, or to somebody else.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Coyote, posted 04-26-2016 3:47 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Coyote, posted 04-26-2016 7:41 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 27 of 162 (782630)
04-26-2016 10:21 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Coyote
04-26-2016 7:41 PM


Re: Heinlein quote
My post was a general one, addressing the dichotomy between faith on one hand and lack thereof on the other.
And, as usual, Heinlein said it better than I could.
Except if it doesn't address anybody's actual experience of faith, he didn't say anything of any value at all. Who, for instance, accepts "propositions by faith?" He has no understanding of faith at all.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Coyote, posted 04-26-2016 7:41 PM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 28 of 162 (782632)
04-26-2016 10:51 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by jar
04-26-2016 11:08 AM


Re: Side Effect of Curiosity
There is apparently no middle ground for me between "abandoning a thread" and dominating it because of all the discussion my posts generate.
Anyway, jar, you were supposedly answering this:
Faith writes:
Where does the Koran describe the idolatrous religions? They are exposed throughout the Bible, and Allah is one of them.
My point was that the Bible gives a history and explanation of the idolatrous religions as it does for many things in this world we wouldn't know about otherwise.
You answered:
jar writes:
According to the Qur'an the other two Judaic faiths, the peoples of the Book, had both become idolatrous which is why God had to send word to hopefully straighten things out. Unlike the Bible that has lots of unknown authors, the Qur'an was directly dictated to Mohammad from God through the angel Gabriel.
Mohammed had that view in common with Joseph Smith. Supposedly God sent them both as prophets to straighten out biblical religion. I suppose it would be interesting to compare what "God" said to his two different "prophets" but that would no doubt take us off topic here.
In any case the Koran does not offer a history and analysis of the origin of idolatrous religions, which is what I said the Bible does, and quite consistently too for a collection of writings by different authors.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by jar, posted 04-26-2016 11:08 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by jar, posted 04-27-2016 8:57 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 31 of 162 (782647)
04-27-2016 5:25 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by Dr Adequate
04-26-2016 11:37 PM


Re: Side Effect of Curiosity
Interesting. It's not a history of idolatry, it includes some phrases that sound like an imitation of the OT, and much of it is an attack on biblical religion, the Trinity, the Son of God and so on, an extension of what jar posted. "Partners" could be aimed at biblical religion, the Trinity that is, but "female gods" raises questions. Could it be referring to Catholicism's saints and Virgin Mary? Makes me wonder if like the religion of Joseph Smith it's been revised over time.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-26-2016 11:37 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 32 of 162 (782648)
04-27-2016 5:43 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by Tangle
04-27-2016 1:45 AM


All books are unique. All faiths claim to be the truth. The people worshipping in the temples of Vietnam believe their version as fervently as you believe yours. The commonality is the need to believe in something, anything will do it seems.
No, I meant it's unique in the sense that it is a history, and it's a history that is coherent over a millennia and a half of different writers. Faith in God based on the Bible is faith based on the historical reports that demonstrate the existence and character of God. Faith in Jesus Christ is based on the historical accounts of His life, crucifixion and resurrection. Not faith in "propositions" as Coyote's Heinlein quote has it. And not just a compendium of teachings which is mostly what other religions are based on.
Knowledge that the future exists as well as the past forces us to think ahead, and knowledge of our certain eventual deaths forces ideas of perpetual life on us. Our imaginations and curiosity inevitably lead to superstitions and inventions designed to satisfy our need to know and understand and take some control of the future. Without rational, evidence based thinking and the scientific method, all they had was stories designed to explain the inexplicable.
I honestly do not believe that any religion ever invented was the product of such psychological motivations. That's the sort of ethnocentric explanation modern westerners are likely to make up out of whole cloth. I believe the majority of the religions, at least the pre-Christian nonbiblical religions, originally came out of experiences of the supernatural or "ghosts" and that sort of thing, and were fitted into inherited myths, such as the distorted mythified versions of the promise of a Savior all inherited from Eden. But practitioners of such religions, especially those who live a monastic life of disciplined meditation and ritual, also experience all kinds of supernatural phenomena which confirms them in their beliefs.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Tangle, posted 04-27-2016 1:45 AM Tangle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by caffeine, posted 04-28-2016 4:50 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 34 of 162 (782661)
04-27-2016 9:44 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by jar
04-27-2016 8:57 AM


Re: Religion as a path -- but most don't lead to God
I see Dr A already provided examples of the Qur'an deals with idolatrous religions and in fact many other religions do as well.
Which is only to be expected of a religion that imitates the Old Testament. But it isn't an answer to my claim, which was that the Bible gives a history of the world that explains how the idolatrous religions came about -- i.e. through the Fall, which gave Satan and his horde power to rule human beings and invent religions that put Satan in the place of God and deny the true God. The Koran merely accuses biblical religion of idolatry, how very clever of the devil.
But there is another way that religions deal with what YOU call idolatrous religions
The Bible is very clear about the nature of idolatrous religions, not just my own notion. Any religion that worships any god but the true God is idolatrous. Pretty clear, jar.
and that is by acknowledging that different people have different beliefs and those beliefs should be respected.
Of course "other religions" do this, but the Bible does not. People should be respected of course, but not all beliefs are to be respected though it always helps to be cautious in how one talks to people about such things. Hinduism is quite famous for accepting all gods and all religions for instance. And the priests of the Roman pagan religions in the time of the early Church would have been happy to accept Christianity as one of their religions too, if it weren't for the fact that the followers of Christ wouldn't accept any religion but Christ. That's what got them thrown to the lions you know.
That by the way is also the position taken in the Bible (ain't it great that the Bible is so filled with contradictions? ).
I'm sure you are familiar with Kings 5 and the story of Naaman the leper.
Remember that as Naaman is about to return to Syria, after he has acknowledged the power of the god of Israel; he asks for two mules of dirt from Israel to take back with him since he wishes to worship the god of Israel and so will need some of Israel so that that god can be with him.
The commentaries I read this morning treat this as a holdover superstition of Naaman's since the God of Israel doesn't need to be worshipped on His own turf. But Naaman is a new believer and needs time to grow into his new religion.
But he has a bigger issue. His master still worships the gods of Syria and so he asks "Is it okay if I go with my master when he worships other gods and support him?" and the answer is that of course he can do so.
That is not the answer he was given. He may have taken it that way but all Elisha said was Go in peace. The commentaries say Elisha didn't give either a yes or no here. Naaman no doubt took it as a freeing of his conscience about participating in his master's idolatrous worship, but he was now a believer in the God of Israel and over time would have to give up the idolatry. By not saying one way or the other Elisha allowed Naaman the time he needed for that.
I'm actually surprised to find the commentaries taking this position because I did think that Elisha essentially told him he could participate with his master without fear of losing his job, knowing that Naaman was now a believer in the God of Israel and needed time to grow in his faith. Perhaps there are other commentaries that take this position but I only read a couple this morning.
In any case this situation is always regarded as an exception to the rule that idolatrous worship is an offense that won't be tolerated. What you are doing is taking the incident out of context as usual. One exception can never be made the rule, and the Bible is otherwise very clear that the rule is that the practice of idolatrous religions violates the Second Commandment will eventually be punished.
There is no admonition to try to get Naaman's master to change allegiance or for Naaman not to go with him to worship the other gods. Common courtesy was of greater importance than which god was being worshiped.
There was certainly wisdom involved in not putting Naaman to such a serious test of his brand-new faith, which he would be alone in practicing when they went back to Syria (or perhaps with others who had witnessed his healing as well) but not courtesy that in any way justified the participation in idolatry, only tolerance for the time being and for the sake of nurturing his new faith.
This is the position held by many of the world's religions, that of religion as a path, a journey; an understanding that different people will follow different paths but that the important points, stewardship, concern for the welfare of others and the world we live in are common to all religions.
Yes indeed, that IS the position of the WORLD'S RELIGIONS which are all followers of the demon gods, but it is not the position of the true religion of the Bible. The things that are common to all religions are not the central thing to the true God, who wants to set people free from sin and from the demonic rule over them that was brought about at the Fall. This "path" is in reality lined with primroses.
I read all that stuff when I first began to study religion and thought all religions were basically the same thing. I started out with Hinduism which besides its own three hundred gods is quite happy to embrace any other gods as well, no one of them considered better than the others. Took me a couple of years of reading to recognize that all religions are not the same, that basically they are all variations on a theme of false religion, except the Bible, which is the only source of the truth about all these things. Of course it offends people to hear that in this day of egalitarianism, and I was quite surprised to come to that conclusion myself based on all my reading.
It's also the position held my much of Christianity today. It's only a small limited segment of today's Christianity that tries to deny the worth and value of all the world's religions.
Not sure how small and limited it is, but in any case any "Christianity" that doesn't recognize that people need to be set free from the other religions is false to the true God.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by jar, posted 04-27-2016 8:57 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by jar, posted 04-27-2016 9:54 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1435 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 36 of 162 (782663)
04-27-2016 10:08 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by jar
04-27-2016 9:54 AM


Re: Religion as a path
I understand that is your position and belief Faith, but it is not what all Christians believe. For example the vast majority of Christians not only understand that the Roman Catholic Church is Christian but are actually Roman Catholics.
And they are sadly deceived and need to be set free from that false belief.
The Bible is filled with contradictions and that is much of its strength.
Another very serious deception you believe and preach to others.
As I pointed out to you in Kings 5 there is no attempt to convert Naamans master and Naaman accompanying him and supporting him in worship of a god other than the God of Israel is accepted.
And as I just pointed out to YOU this is not the case. It was NOT "accepted" but at best tolerated for the sake of not trying Naaman's new faith beyond his tolerance.
The very term Israel alludes to the common Hebrew understanding at that time that mankind struggles with both God and man.
It was only Jacob who struggled with God and was named Israel or Prince with God. You make up meanings that are not in the Bible.
But your strongly held beliefs are no more valid than others strongly held beliefs. The big difference is that most Roman Catholics would recognize that you too are a Christian.
That would not have been the case a hundred or so years ago and certainly not in the time of the Reformation and earlier when I would have been tortured to death for my "heresy."
Some beliefs ARE more valid than others, some doctrines ARE false and only one is true. It isn't who holds them but objective criteria that determine which is which. The Bible is really quite clear to an honest reading which is which.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by jar, posted 04-27-2016 9:54 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by jar, posted 04-27-2016 10:24 AM Faith has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024