I will admit that I have learned much about Christianity from the SDMB. But it has also firmed my resolve in Buddhism. It is (miracle of miracles!) A godless religion. I am amazed by the reliance people have for an outside source. I think that only you can make yourself happy, just like only you can make yourself angry. No need for a god.
No, I don’t doubt it. Doesn’t sound like Gore’s plan to mix church and state differed much from Bush’s.
I’m sure it’s not only the catholics. Perhaps it’s just that they are a lot bigger then any one protestant denomination, so when one of their high ranking people says something, it gets more media attention. Around here (NY Metro area) the catholics get more media attention then any other religion.
And, come to think of it, the bible-based laws that date back to colonial days are presumably the protestants’ fault!
But I wasn’t thinking about anything that long ago. I can’t provide a link to anything as this isn’t based on anything I’ve seen on the internet. It just seems to me that every now and then over the years I’ve seen newspaper articles and/or tv news coverage in which a bishop or cardinal calls upon govt to forbid something. In-vitro fertilization comes to mind. My feeling was, oh, yeah? your church decides this new medical breakthrough is sinful, so you want the govt to forbid it for everyone?
Kyomara, I think most of the objections I listed were to christianity itself; in particular to its assertion that one gets to heaven only if one holds the correct beliefs. Everyone who is not a christian, no matter how good a life they may have led, is doomed to an eternity of torment in hell. Am I wrong? Does christianity not say this? In fact, isn’t this belief a key element of christianity?
I also objected to the assertion that believers in the wrong version of christianity go straight to hell. Maybe that intolerant belief is held only by SOME christians?
We’re back to what some Christians believe vs what all Christians believe.
There are a great many Christian denominations (including most–not all–of the major ones), who specifically do not teach that only those who believe the right things are saved.
Most of the people who believe your second paragraph certainly believe your first paragraph.
Most of the people who reject your second paragraph, also reject your first paragraph.
It is entirely possible that the loudest Christians in the U.S. belive what you have posted.
It is absolutely not a tenet of Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans/Episcopalians, or the majority of Lutherans. There are a number of other Christian groups who also do not believe that they will be the only ones in heaven.
Hazel sez:
That wasn’t the version of Christianity that I grew up with, but what the heck. 
The following webpage discusses the issue in some depth. My summary: it varies with the branch of Christianity (and with the person, I might add.)
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_savc.htm
My father is an Episcopal priest, and he doesn’t believe any of that.
Christianity is a big religion with millions and millions and millions of believers. Naturally there are variations in what different sects and individuals believe in terms of their Christianity. And different sects focus on different aspects of Jesus’ teachings. Liek any other religion, Christianity can be good or bad depending on what you get out of it and what you do with it.
Again, not all sects concern themselves with ridiculous crap like this. The numerous joint projects undertaken by inter-sect and inter-faith groups all over the world illustrate this. There are Christians on this very board who do not share in these beliefs nor feel the need to argue about who’s going to heaven and who’s going to hell.
Are you:
a) totally unaware of any of this?
or
b) aware of all of this but don’t feel it is relevant?
One thing I have gotten from the SDMB is a sense of nostalgia for the good ol’ days, when we could burn the lot of you at the stake and be shut of you heretics once and for all. Then my pastor reminds me I’m not Catholic anymore and I’m not allowed the fun of the occasional inquisition. Darn.
Yes, my pre-Vatican II training did say that only Catholics could go to Heaven, although most of us would spend an eon or two in Purgatory first. Those who had been exposed to Catholicism but had rejected it as the correct way, such as Protestants and Jews, would go to Hell. Those who had never heard of Jesus couldn’t help it, but also couldn’t get into Heaven. They ended up in Limbo, a nice place, but without God’s presence.
All that changed in the mid-60s, but since my teachers were all trained the old way we were all pretty confused until my formal religious training ended a few years later.
I retract that statement.
I thing ‘devout’ may have been a bit strong a word. I guess the point I was getting at was the he was no athiest, like some Christians would have you believe.
(Let the stoning begin. =)
So Hitler was Christian-what does that prove? By that kind of statement, I could point out that Lenin and Stalin were both atheists.
But then, look at people like Martin Luther King and Mother Theresa, who were also devout Christians.
flowbark:
Well, I have to admit that I base that assertion on my own personal experiences. I’ve spent a lot of time around people that I would tend to categorize as FCC (if I were so inclined to categorize). None of them ever called themselves fundamentalist. I even remember an interview with Jerry Falwell, where the interviewer referred to Falwell as a fundamentalist. Falwell said he didn’t like the term fundamentalist because it carries such a negative connotation. I think most fundamentalist Christians would probably prefer to be called devout.
And I didn’t mean to insinuate that either has less than genuine intentions. My only points were (1) it’s naive to assume anything about a person’s motives based on their posting on this or any other board and (2) stereotyping can only lead to poor assumptions about a person’s motives or beliefs.
Hazel:
I think most Christians subscribe to the belief that the only criteria for “everlasting life” was given by Jesus and quoted in John 3:16. Not wanting to ‘witness’, I’ll let you look it up, if you’re so inclined.
Wildest Bill is a moderator? Good Lord, when did this happen?
Wildest Bill is not a moderator, IIRC. Oops. 
Joey:
Interesting. It reminds me a little of the liberals who re-labeled themselves as progressives during the 1980s.
But let’s face it, if we want to refer to a religious grouping with a certain set of beliefs, the modifier “devout” won’t cut it. One can be a devout member of any religious sect.
Um, I don’t think we’re talking about motives, we’re talking about beliefs. And those can be gleaned from the content of the posts.
I mean, c’mon. I’ve never heard jshore or Stoid explicitly describe themselves as left-of-center, but, judging from their posts I am comfortable labeling them that way. (Apologies, gang, if appropriate.)
Still, I think that you are cautioning me not to jump to conclusions. And I agree that is sound advice.
I feel exactly the same way. Gimme some of that Old Time Religion.
I am officially a muslim, and actually not practising any religion even though I do believe in God.
The main influence in my staying at a distance to all religious practice is the existence and the all-staining effect they have on society.
Be it muslim fundamentalism (ultimately seeking a regime like in Iran of Afghanistan), be it christian fundamentalism (ultimately seeking Inquisition - maybe we should be glad that at least they don’t have a contemporary example they can point to and join forces with), or any other kind of fundamentalism…it is harmful to mankind.
Only minds not deep enpough to think can be fanatics or religious fundamentalists, because the teaching of all religions relies on faith - never on knowledge.
Trying to prove anything makes no sense in the realm of religion, and I strongly believe it is nobody’s business to examine and evaluate my faith. Nobody is entitled to judge me in anything that is supposed to be between me and God, except God!!
As for the general rules to regulate everyday life. Secular laws are practically the “perfect tool”. What other power can be more right and just about relations between human beings than human beings themselves??
So - I am not getting converted into anything. I am satisfied - not overly happy maybe, but satisfied - in being a rational human being.
Whatever goes between God and me is…well by definition , it is between God and me! Private! Please keep your noses out of it. Thanks.
I am sorry…This sentence takes away all meaning of the post!
It was meant to be:
…existence of FUNDAMENTALISTS and the all-staining