I am putting the most recent post by the paranormal pastor here today. Mostly because he is starting a discussion of the relationship between his faith and the paranormal, which very much makes it a philosophical discussion. Like him, I will warn everyone up front that this link contains Christian Dogma and Biblical Exposition.

Now, if that hasn't scared everyone off, the link is here

Part two can be found here.

Part three is here

The church I grew up in was of the "everything ghostly or supernatural is of the devil" variety. That had the effect of coloring my views badly for a long time, and still makes it difficult for me to be comfortable in certain situations. It's amazing how something taught to you as a child haunts you as an adult.

However, my personal research and study has shown me that some of the same errors in that way of thinking that the Paranormal Pastor points out.

That said, it sounds like my childhood was a cake walk compared to yours. I wouldn't want the baggage that has to come with that sort of past.

I met a good Jesuit priest once, he introduced me to the words of a man who was indeed very close to his buddhahood. Does the church no longer follow the teachings of that kind and gentle man they claim to be their source of strength, wisdom and guidance?

Psalm 37:28
1 John 4:9-11


1 John 4:19-20
1 John 3:10

I would say there are individuals and non-denominational churches that still attempt to follow the teachings of Christ (tell the world about him, but don't force the world. Love God with everything that is you, and love others as you desire to be loved). But I think Swope best describes the feelings I have had lately with regards to organized Christianity:

American Christianity is not quite the following Jesus had in mind. The Holiness movement of the mid 1800s and the Fundamentalist movement of the early 20th century has robbed the Christian Church in America of much of it's independent thought and action. I think God honors people who honor Him, but He still weeps when the Church acts like a business, and treats people as mere assets.

Hannah,

I wasn't part of the rescue, but I remember when it happened. From the sound of it those who ran that place were very evil, and your father was wise to take all the precautions he did.

This is one of the reasons I personally hate the label "Christian" because that term has become so diluted by misuse and abuse (even to the point where it is used to hawk goods to people).

There will alway be those out there that use religion as a tool to manipulate and take advantage of people. They are ready to present wells crafted arguments why they are right and everyone else is wrong. Jim Jones is one from history that is a good example of this.

I know this is late, but I am sorry to hear that Hannah. I am sure your mom has her reasons for staying behind, and it could be simply she is afraid what will happen to someone else if she leaves. You should try to take hope in the fact that it sounds like she is not caught up with fanaticism.

I am also sorry to hear that your family is going through yet another rough time. It seems like there is always something or someone trying to cause turmoil in your family.

You'll see her again, Hannah.

I know, I was sitting across the table from her when I wrote it.

Hannah wrote:She was sitting in front of you and you didn't tell us!!! You didn't tell me!!!!

I couldn't. You were in custody, your dad was under a microscope -- I had to keep her out of danger by keeping her a secret.

I am reminded of the words of Mohandas Ghandi: "I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." Too often Christ is misquoted so that a "Christian" can lead other people to do what he wants them to do not what Christ would have said they could do.

First Peter changed the Law of the Jews for the followers of Christ when he said that they could follow the customs of the Gentiles -- eating unclean food, etc. Jesus said,"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the Truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practises and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. The Law he is referring to is the Law of the Jews -- Laws which forbid the eating of unclean food and associating with Gentiles.

Next Paul changes the ways Christians live. Jesus had told his followers to live without material possessions or familial encumberance, but Paul tells his churches to own property, and to marry, and to make money. Christians are not followers of Jesus, the Christ, but of Paul (Saul), the murderer of Christians. This man who hunted and killed Christians appears to have found that the best way to kill the real Christian movement was to alter it to the point that it had nothing to do with Jesus any longer.

Chen Lung wrote:I am reminded of the words of Mohandas Ghandi: "I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." Too often Christ is misquoted so that a "Christian" can lead other people to do what he wants them to do not what Christ would have said they could do.

While Christ is often misquoted and things that should never be done is done in His name, I find myself having to disagree with you to a point. I do not want this to become a heated debate, but I did see some misconceptions regarding Christianity.

First, Peter really didn't change the Jewish Law for followers, but was understanding a teaching Christ had already taught (and apparently Peter was too thick skulled to get after an explanation or too set in his ways to change). To quote Matthew 15:

Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, "Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don't wash their hands before they eat!"

Jesus replied, "And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, 'Honor your father and mother'[a] and 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.'[b] But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, 'Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,' he is not to 'honor his father[c]' with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:
" 'These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
They worship me in vain;
their teachings are but rules taught by men.'[d]"

Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen and understand. What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.' "

Then the disciples came to him and asked, "Do you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this?"

He replied, "Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots. 14Leave them; they are blind guides.[e] If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit."

Peter said, "Explain the parable to us."

"Are you still so dull?" Jesus asked them. "Don't you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body? But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man 'unclean.' For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. These are what make a man 'unclean'; but eating with unwashed hands does not make him 'unclean.' "

So Peter didn't change what Christ said, he just finally understood it.

Second, Jesus never taught his followers to live a life of a monk. If he did then he would never had taught them on the subjects of divorce, marriage (why teach these if everyone was to be celibate?), giving to the poor (why teach it if no follower would own anything?), or bothering to warn his followers against living only to gain material possessions?

The Law you declares He demands a Christian uphold itself speaks of it being good to reproduce and multiply, and speaks of being blessed by wealth and prosperity. What he was speaking against, was the Pharisaical legalism. It was a hollow sham to make it appear that they were following the laws to outward appearances, but in reality only paying lip service to them. He was bashing their teaching of righteousness by your own works, and trying to explain that righteousness only comes from faith in Him and His works.

And you are right, most modern christian churches have become the imitators of the Pharisees that Christ spoke so passionately against. They have created this legal minefield that everyone has to negotiate through to find Christ, all the while missing the message of preaching and showing God's Love. A current topic that bothers me is the issue of homosexuality. I by no means know the answers to the many theological questions on this topic, but it seems somehow the opposite of Christ's message of love and redemption to condemn someone to hell or show so much hatred. I cannot help but hear echoes of the demand that we remove our own sins and shortcomings before we start pointing out other's.

Anyhow, just my two cents.

Try a book entitled: Misquoting Jesus, The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Way, by Bart D. Ehrman.

It is simply the misuse of the word truth in the religious sense that causes the problem. Religion is not about "Truth" it is about belief where science is not about "Belief" it is about truth.

I find this thread and the linked articles near the top to be very interesting. As a man born and raised in an Islamic Asian country, I find it curious that such a conflict can even exist. The conflict assumes an all or nothing argument. I find this way of thinking to be very Western. I think that it comes from Aristotle. Aristotles' writings or at least what still survives of them, seem to assume a single great truth which precludes all other truths as possibilities. Physicists now call this single truth such titles as the Universal Theory of Everything or the Combined Theory of the Universe. This world view has served Western Civilization well, leading to the scientific method and Agatha Christie novels. In many Eastern cultures, even direct conflicts of world views are not really conflicts if they are derived from different aspects of life. If a geology book states that the Earth is one billion years old and a Shinto book states that the world is seven thousand years old, that is okay because religious truth and scientific truth each exist their own worlds.