<p>Ah, Jesus said that too: something along the lines of 'The truth is within you' and 'You are the temple of the Living God' and 'Ask and you shall receive'</p>
<p>I take that to mean that the 'Holy Spirit' will guide us if we ask.</p>
<p>I trust the Living Spirit of God more than I do any human preacher. The spirit of God is alive; whereas the rules of religion are created by humans based on their (usually narrow) interpretation of a book that they have been led to believe came from God.</p>
<p>And even then, they cannot agree amongst themselves. Hence, there are hundreds of denominations even within the Christian faith...each one claiming to be authentic. Point being that the bible is subject to interpretation. (There are even scriptures that back up a belief in reincarnation, for example, but only a few Christian churches that I know of believes in reincarnation.)</p>
<p>There are many 'holy books' - the bible is not the only one. And not all of the original documents were decided to be included in the bible. (This decision was made by humans, btw.)</p>
<p>The Hindus believe the Bhagavad Gita is the 'Word of God.' </p>
<p>What I don't understand is how the Christians can talk about the Holy Spirit, but they are afraid to trust that Spirit and instead must rely on what is dictated to them by their priests.</p>
<p>Christians are not in favor of war, intolerance, nor judgment. Christians are opposed to killing, that would mean abortion or death penalty. Just because some are for it done not make it Christianity’s official stance.</p>
<p>I agree that just because some are in favor of it does not mean all are or that it's the official stance. I apologize if I implied that ALL Christians are a certain way! I have some wonderful, beautiful Christian friends and I am sorry if I came across anti-Christian. I was a born-again Christian myself for several years and still retain some (though not all) of the beliefs. I definitely believe in seeing the good in people, and obviously there is a lot of good in Christianity. </p>
<p>I'm just really confused and concerned about the high level of political activism (which translates to judgment/intolerance of gays, and promoting war) that has been gaining in momentum the last few years.</p>
<p>I guess I've had a bad experience. I live in an area with a high concentration of born-again Christians/Catholics/Baptists etc who are very political. It amazes me how they can be so much in favor or war. Several of them have even said things like "Kill 'em all!" when speaking of the 'enemy.' When I propose to them the radical notion that perhaps not all of the alternative options were exhausted before going to war, they smirk as though that is stupid.</p>
<p>Granted, these are a few people. But it's not just that. I've attended church services in several different churches during the time of the last election, and I was astounded at the amount of political rousing that went on during the sermon.</p>
<p>Many of them have told me that their church made a stance in favor of Bush and that is why they voted for him. So, directly or indirectly, Bush's religious base has contributed to the war machine.</p>
<p>As a Christian, I think Jesus weeps whenever a war occurs, or whenever someone causes violence, pain, or suffering on another person. War and violence is definitely not something that is compatable with the message of Christ. HOWEVER, we live in a world where if you are not willing to defend yourself now and again, you will end up as someone's slave. Governments must have the right to defend themselves against attack, for the well-being of their citizens, to keep the peace. This may or may not be less-than-Godly, but the vast majority of human beings nevertheless support this notion. Don't you?</p>
<p>I firmly believe that this is what the US and her allies are trying to do in Afghanistan and Iraq. We were attacked viciously on 9/11, and in order to protect our citizens from further such attacks, we had to do something unique. Unfortunately, there is no country called Al-Qaedia -- those who want us dead are a shadowy entity, not a state. The question then became, how can we stop them? The answer, to the Bush administration, was to plant democracy in the heart of the Middle East, the breeding ground of the deadly ideology known as radical Islam. And if the US and her allies can succeed in establishing self-sustaining democracies there, and liberty (as it tends to do) spreads, we will all be much safer because of it. (This is why, BTW, the insurgents and terrorists in Iraq are fighting so hard against us -- they know that healthy democracies in the region will be the end of them.)</p>
<p>The war in Iraq is not about killing people; it is about saving lives. We are defending ourselves against the proponents of radical Islam in the most effective and humane way possible. I wish more people could see through the liberal anti-Bush hysteria and understand this. It seems the left would just rather put their heads in the sand and pretend that we aren't in danger.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I wish more people could see through the liberal anti-Bush hysteria and understand this. It seems the left would just rather put their heads in the sand and pretend that we aren't in danger.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>See...that's the thing, how do you get the impression that liberals are "pretending" to be in danger? Because they want to leave Iraq? You do realize, of course, that the war is now just as unpopular with republicans than with democrats, right? And because they want their troops home, away from danger, means they're afraid? Come one. </p>
<p>The way in which you hope democracy will be planted in the middle east will not happen. It's not realistic. If you would take a step back from you ideals, hopefully you would realize that this attack (which had nothing to do with Al Qaeda) has inflamed the region and spread more hatred.</p>
<p>"The way in which you hope democracy will be planted in the middle east will not happen. It's not realistic. If you would take a step back from you ideals, hopefully you would realize that this attack (which had nothing to do with Al Qaeda) has inflamed the region and spread more hatred."</p>
<p>You need to give it time. Democracy in a region as stone-age backwards-assed as the Middle East is not going to happen overnight. It will be a struggle, and a long one. But at the end of the day, freedom will reign and the world will be a safer place -- that is, if we want it. Your defeatism sure isn't helping. People like you are the reason why the American people are losing confidence in this mission, NOT because of the facts.</p>
<p>Then you should be writing to all you republican congressman and tell them exactly what you told me, because they are now just as against this war as the rest of country.</p>
<p>And by the way, this country is ruled by majority, not what is morally acceptable to a few. The MAJORITY of this country is against this war, so it is the President's duty to respond. Or...are you forgetting the ethics of this country?</p>
<p>The President is the commander-in-chief, and he has chosen to continue the mission. Case closed. The American people, by majority vote, effectively OK'd the mission in Iraq when they re-elected him in late 2004. If the American people have had a change of heart since then, then they can vote for whatever sack of sh** the Democrats offer up in the next presidential election. Probably Hillary.</p>
<p>Good job Fides et Ratio in representing the Catholic faith a little. When I clicked the thread I expected to see 7 pages of Catholic-bashing. This thread only contains about 2 pages of Catholic bashing. =D</p>
<p>Just so, everyone knows, Catholic does not equate to any political party.
I am a strong catholic, I abhor conservatives, and I’m pretty sure fides feels the same way about liberals. We cannot pigeonhole one’s beliefs into politics; they’re not a good fit.</p>
<p>Lol, yeah, I was pleasantly surprised to find so little Catholic-bashing in this thread! I'm an an ex-Lutheran-current-Roman Catholic myself, so I have a fairly good grasp of both sides. I want to mention that its wrong to group all protestants into one group because they are all so different from one another. Lutheranism is quite simiar to Catholicism (although I feel there are some things missing in it) and I never experienced anti-Catholicism at my old Lutheran church. Nor have I ever heard any Catholic church denounce protestants. However, I have experienced quite a bit of anti-Catholicism from several "born-again" variety evangelicals as well as from the liberal end of the spectrum. On that note, I would like to make a couple rebuttals:</p>
<p>"What do you disagree with, the fact that he was Jewish? that he actaully did create the elaborate christian religion before he died? And if he did...why would he name it after himself?" </p>
<p>Of course Jesus was Jewish, he came in order to fulfill prophecies made by Jewish prophets- which essentially changed Judaism into what we now know as Christianity. Jesus didn't give it a name, nor did he ever intend for it to be an entirely different religion- simply a continuation of the religion handed down in the Jewish tradition.</p>
<p>"And what's really the kicker, is that the real Jesus of Nazareth based his life on helping people, the misrepresented; jews, slaves, women, all of whom this man tried to help. If Jesus himself personally created this religion, why would it chant against homoxexuality, chant that women are inferior, and that if you didn't belong to this religion you were automatically going to hell?"</p>
<p>Catholics do not "chant" against the misrepresented. True, we don't believe that homosexual behavior is to be condoned, but Catholics are told to love everyone and treat them as EQUALS. And we are told that it is NEVER our right to judge another person's soul. You should really read the Catechism before you make accusations.</p>
<p>Fides, I appreciate the respectful discussion. I really do believe that, deep down, we all do want the same thing. We want to live in a peaceful, loving world.</p>
<p>I know that you really believe that Bush is 'liberating' the Iraqis. I happen to disagree with that, and I would like to invite you to consider my reasons.</p>
<p>I believe the Iraqis see this as an invasion, not a liberation, and I think it is naive to think that bush had the Iraqis' wellbeing in mind when he went to war.</p>
<p>You think I am 'burying my head in the sand' while I think the same thing about bush supporters. Interesting how we each think the other is misled!</p>
<p>I would like to suggest an open-minded exchange of ideas. I will start by asking you to elaborate on what you think 'liberals' are in denial about, and I will be open to consider whatever you say.</p>
<p>In exchange, I would like to invite you to read my thread entitled 'Seeking Physics Scholars' in this section of the forum, and visit the websites that I list. All with an open mind, of course.</p>
<p>It may be that each of us can learn from the other! Whaddya say?</p>
<p>"...About 100,000 Iraqi civilians - half of them women and children - have died in
Iraq since the invasion, mostly as a result of airstrikes by coalition forces, according to the first reliable study of the death toll from Iraqi and US public health experts.</p>
<p>The study, which was carried out in 33 randomly-chosen neighbourhoods of Iraq representative of the entire population, shows that violence is now the leading cause of death in Iraq. Before the invasion, most people died of heart attacks, stroke and chronic illness. The risk of a violent death is now 58 times higher than it was before the invasion..."</p>
<p>Well, it WAS respectful...I just read the later posts AFTER I posted my reply to the earlier posts...</p>
<p>Anyway:</p>
<p>"...he has chosen to continue the mission. Case closed. The American people, by majority vote, effectively OK'd the mission in Iraq when they re-elected him in late 2004..."</p>
<p>Case closed? Hmmm...that sounds exactly like Bush's attitude. He think that since he lives in the big house he doesn't have to answer to the people, or to the rest of the world. He has forgotten that the President is supposed to 'serve the will of the people.' His arrogance and hubris are beyond belief.</p>
<p>Are we sheeple? Are we supposed to just blindly accept what the govt. tells us? Is not dissent (the right to disagree) one of our liberties that is so valued by democracy?</p>
<p>And, btw, bush has never been elected by majority rule. In fact, he lost both times. Only by voting fraud did bush land in the white house.</p>
<p>Check it out. There's evidence. But because the House and Senate are run by Republicans, nothing's being done.</p>
<p>It's the beginning of Fascism. It's happening right here in our country, and people are burying their heads in the sand.</p>
<p>Please prove me wrong. I am willing to read whatever info you send me. Will you read this? (the above link and the links on the 'Seeking Physics Scholars' thread)</p>
<p>Open-minded discussion of opposing ideas is the only way to bring about lasting peace. Let's try to understand one another and quit pointing fingers.</p>
<p>Getting back to the original topic of this thread:</p>
<p>I have been both Catholic and born-again Christian. I have met some truly wonderful people of both persuasions, and I don't like to generalize. However, IN GENERAL I have found the born-again Christians to be much more fanatical and judmental. Not all of them, of course, but there is definitely a very active movement to basically discredit anyone who disagrees with them. I have met born-agains who think Mormons and Catholics are not Christian! Yeah, no kidding! They think Mormons and Catholics are going to 'hell' because they're not 'true' Christians.</p>
<p>You already know what they think of the Buddhists and Hindus.</p>
<p>When I was Catholic, I was taught that only Catholics went to heaven. But people of other religions did not go to 'hell' - they only went to 'limbo' where they didn't suffer - they just didn't get to 'see God.'</p>
<p>I reject both of these ideas now, but I'd have to say the Catholic view is at least more merciful than the born-again view.</p>
<p>The Jesus camp movie is a perfect example of what can lead to. Stuff like that would never occur in the Catholic Church because of the doctrine within the church prevents it. Protestantism has no set path so people just make the bible whatever they want. </p>
<p>Protestants tell me that the church laws are stupid and unfounded, but those canon laws is what keeps the faith true and prevents the bible from being distorted in to some lady’s dream of a Christian army.</p>
<p>The Catholic faith has remained the unchanged and true through centuries, however the protestant religion has been morphed into so many different versions and philosophies it has lead to the zealots that are in Jesus Camp.</p>