A Necessary Schism in Christianity

Neaj Pa Bol wrote: Many things to this day are unclear as to what the term Christanity is... (Just my Point of View, no on elses).

From the begining, the idea of the philosophy has and still is focused on Jesus and his teachings.
But when the Nician (SP?) council decided what was to be the religious text (The Bible), opinions, points of view and what are agreed, singular books used to make up the bible, left much out and that was the begining of not just one chirstian belief and it has continued to change over the decades and centuries, bringing the concept to people to seek what is for them.

I have been associated by birth, famiy, and choice around Protestant, Catholic, Nazarene, Russian Orthodox, non-denom, Mormon, etc. in my life. Pagan is a term in the begining, of the culture, ceremonies, way of life that were adopted and changed some to bring the fold of people to the church. So one could say nothing is permenent.

I call myself Christian, but my outlook may differ a bit from another, that is how it works in this world, and that is ok, and good...

Everything has it's purpose and this is just my view of things....

Everything we are and are to be is not what makes us happy in a material world, but rather in what we do to serve.

In my service to what I believe with Jediism included is who I am... Let your heart help you find your path.... I feel everything is between you and God (Higher Power, etc. and The Force).

I have always told those who come with a Christian background is, you have to find what is comfortable for you. It is your path, no one can choose it for you or follow it for you...

MTFBWYAAF

Glad you mentioned the way the way the Bible was composed. It's an intense point of debate among Christians as to which Bible translation is best (and to a select few radicals, which one is the real Bible), and many of us such as myself realize that it is not a single, infallable work, but has been subject to selectiveness on the part of the translators and scribes. The way I see it, Jesus is God, so if something in the Bible seems to go against his teachings, I don't follow it. Perhaps I'm just a heretic...

I believe Marcus Aurelius said it best, “Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.”

As far as calling for a Schism in Christianity over differences in belief... hasn't there been enough of that already? I've always thought it would be better to unite the different sects of Christianity, as a united Church would be much more powerful than the current divided one we see today. There will probably never be complete agreement, as everyone's perceptions are different. Even knowing that the Christian Holy Book (for the word "bible" merely means "book") has been selectively edited over the centuries, there will still always be those that will take every word of it as absolute fact, meant to be taken literally word for word. There will be still others that see it as a book of parables, stories meant to show us how to live a good life. Then there's everyone that believes something somewhere in between those two extremes. Perhaps if we forgot about labels altogether and just lived a good life, treating others as we would like to be treated, honoring each other for our differences, then maybe, just maybe, we could be better "_____" (filled in with whatever label you choose). Or just better humans. That's a pretty good label that fits everyone.

While I would like to see all Christians get along, sometimes getting along is not the most desirable thing. I mean, if getting along with someone means being indifferent to bad things they are doing, and showing apathy toward injustice, then I'd prefer an eternal war. A united church would be horribly bad! Look at the state of Christianity when there was only the Catholic church: all dissenters or people who politely disagreed were killed and/or tortured.

I guess I just wrote out of anger. The quote in your post was right on, by the way. It just astonishes me how tons of people can make God look like a tyrant, and at the same time claim he is not and then be assholes, because that's what they say God wants them to do.

Sorry I sound mad, I'm a recovering Southern Baptist

While I agree that modern mainstream Christianity has vastly missed the mark in regards to Christ-like behavior, I disagree (from a biblical perspective, and not one of doctrine) with what I understood of your statements.

For example, I have a hard time believing that something like Hell isn't integral to Christianity, since Christ Himself spoke of it on quite a regular basis; most of the red ink spilled on those holy pages is spent either warning of the wages of sin and the hereafter, or discussing how He is the only path by which to avoid said state of existence.

steamboat28 wrote: While I agree that modern mainstream Christianity has vastly missed the mark in regards to Christ-like behavior, I disagree (from a biblical perspective, and not one of doctrine) with what I understood of your statements.

For example, I have a hard time believing that something like Hell isn't integral to Christianity, since Christ Himself spoke of it on quite a regular basis; most of the red ink spilled on those holy pages is spent either warning of the wages of sin and the hereafter, or discussing how He is the only path by which to avoid said state of existence.

Christ didn't speak of it in a literal sense, and that's pretty obvious. The Old Testament doesn't speak of it either. There are words like "Sheol" and "Gehenna," which refer to death and the grave, but in many bible translations it is translated as Hell/Hades, both of which come from European paganism (Germanic and Greek, respectively). Hell is clearly an imported concept that is foreign to Judeo-Christian beliefs. In early Christianity, those who came from long established Christian families generally believed in universal reconciliation, while those who believed in hell were often converts from other religions. Origen is a good example of this.

Look at how many Christians today see the light. Universal reconciliation is a key belief of Eastern Orthodoxy (google Hilarion Alfeyev to see what I mean). I myself am looking into the United Methodist Church, which considers universal reconciliation to be a possibility.

And then there are the many Christians who, despite not being universalists nonetheless do not accept the doctrine of Hell. C.S. Lewis, for example,considered universalism to be a possibility, but insisted that if Hell exists in some manner of speaking, it is certainly not a place of eternal torment. The Church of England teaches annihilationism. Even the Catholic church denies that hell is a literal place.

I know you've probably been told that any kind of denial of hell is just wishful thinking, but look at the people behind the doctrines. I'd rather side with F.W. Farrar and Origen than Jerry Fatass Falwell.

Regardless of the nature of Hell, or its origins (which aren't Greek, but are rather traced from Zoroastrianism during the Babylonian captivity of Christianity's parent religion), the fact remains that Christ set himself as a limiter of salvation; the only doorway and the narrow path whereby believers may enter into true and eternal Communion with the Father. Since Christ, his teachings, and those roles specifically are the foundation, keystone, and linchpin of Christianity--they are what makes Christians Christian--it seems to me they should be treated with more than a flippant nod. Otherwise, we're not Christian at all, just a non-messianic Abrahamic sect.

i agree because the religion needs to teach love thats the only rule in the universe.

I'm not a Christian, so this is merely the two cents from someone on the other side of the fence.

Christian. To me, "Of Christ". The church, I figure, has lost its way, corrupted by the trappings of power. The Roman Catholic Empire and the Church of England Schisms saw to that.

There needs to be a reformation if any hope is to be recovered. Go back to the original teachings and make them fit the current world. That's why we're here in the first place, isn't it? To adapt something to fit our world? Peace, tolerance, all the stuff that makes it the Good Book.

Cast away the downright intolerance that the hardliners cry out whenever they're opposed. Join the real world and further the cause of good, and light, in the world.

Or not. Your choice, ultimately. Even the Vatican is noticing lowering attendance in its churches. There's a book I'd definitely recommend: "Why Christianity Must Change- Or Die. by John Shelby Spong, a bishop(?) in America, who lived through a lot of controversial times.

i fully agree with this the fact of the matter is i think thst the christian church has become rather a monster they judge which theyre own religion tells them not to do they cant seem to accept others. as a former catholic i remember how this religion in my own opinion blinded me to reality i am not saying this to insult those who are following this path but these are my own opinions i had met nothing but intolorence and inacceptance when i followed the christians more so on deeper study of the religion i have learned things i did not know about the religion the caused me to qeustion it however to those who do follow it i am not judging if this is where your heart is the follow it but for myself it was not a fit i cannot see myself ever following this path again the only religious groups that accepted me without judgement have been the pagans and of course the jedi

Alternative groups know what it's like to be judged, so they don't do it as often.