A recurring thought as I pass two very different churches on the way home

(cross post from GD for extended debate)

These two churches are very different and are side by side. Neither of them are "old religions" but are unique and were established in the United States within the last few hundred years and their beliefs clash with each other. If holy men and attendees from each of these churches are honest with themselves they will acknowledge that if they are correct, the other one of is incorrect. For the beliefs of Church A to be correct, the members of Church B are wrong and might possibly risk eternal damnation for not believing exactly as do the members of Church A. If they are truly honest people they'd also have to admit that there is just as likely a chance that they are the ones going to hell as are the members of the other church. But still each week (that I'm up in time) both churches' parking lots are full. I wonder if they've ever wondered which of them is right and contemplated the possibility that they might be wrong.

There might be 147,263 different gods, each with their own heaven and hell and where you go depends on which church you belong to. Atheists, of course, have their own very special heaven that doesn't have a god. But don't worry about the lack of a god in atheist heaven 'cause the beer is free, the people there are all very smart, and the library is huge.

"...the beer is free, the people there are all very smart, and the library is huge"

Do you know their pet policy?

"Man is a Religious Animal. He is the only Religious Animal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion--several of them. He is the only animal that loves his neighbor as himself and cuts his throat if his theology isn't straight. He has made a graveyard of the globe in trying his honest best to smooth his brother's path to happiness and heaven....The higher animals have no religion. And we are told that they are going to be left out in the Hereafter. I wonder why? It seems questionable taste."
-"The Lowest Animal"

There is no room (nor need) for analysis.

If they wanted to think, they'd go to the book store on Sunday.

I couldnt sit there week after week hoping I was right and all of those other fools were wrong. Plus, there are a thousand religions what would the odds be that I found the One True Right one?

Eh, see you at the UU or the Buddhist Weekly

"Betting on infinity" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZpJ7yUPwdU

Along the lines of what you said:

If they wanted to think, they'd go to the book store on Sunday.

because people who believe in God dont spend time in contemplation? :shrug:

A's congregants *know* that B is bullshit and likewise. Thinking about it isn't encouraged because thinking is dangerous: It may lead to the realization that while both can't be right, both can be wrong.

For instance (and surprisingly) here in Tulsa, one of the largest Catholic churches (which caters primarily to the Hispanic community) is located virtually next door to a seedy strip club. I think the church is trying to buy up all the buildings around it to pressure it to move but no go so far.

Also, once there was a Baptist church next to a gay club next to a new age church in the same old strip mall. A friend of mine who was into yoga at the time talked me into going along with him to see what the new age church's yoga class was like (it was quite a work out, which was funny because Jazzercise's class was all about chakras and energy and other baloney). Anyway, I always wondered how everyone dealt with each other in the parking lot when all 3 groups had an event at the same time. :)

TlalocW

I mean, I know that members of these churches might see it that way, but it would behoove them to go back and actually read scripture.

I would be willing to bet that if you put their statements of faith up next to each other, there'd be much more in common than there would be different. In fact, I'd even go so far as to stay that they would most likely agree on what would be considered the 'non-negotiables' of the Christian faith.

Everything else is, quite honestly, noise.

Paul, in Romans 14 talks about disputable matters, food and drink in this case. However, the lesson applies to other things as well and, in this generation, could easily be applied to TV or movies or music or other things similar to that. Too many Christians allow stuff like this to get in the way of "living a life of goodness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit".

Lastly, if the first point is true (they're doctrinally very similar, particularly in the foundational bits of the Christian faith) then what would lead to you believe that either Church A or Church B would be headed to eternal damnation?

Perhaps a reminder from Luke 9 is in order.



Even the disciples thought that you had be part of the "in crowd" to be blessed. Jesus basically tells them "Ummm...no, you morons." Churches today would do well to remember this lesson, that unity doesn't mean uniformity.

Only taking two verses out of an entire chapter and interpreting them literally? That that kind of out-of-context literalism is "looking at scripture through the same eyes as the anti-gay, anti-woman, anti-everything fundieloons" or so you said in another thread.

...then we will.

As for now, there's only 3 possible reasons for your response:

1) You're looking to pick a fight.
2) You can't/don't understand anything I've previously said about literalism and fundamentalism.
3) You do understand, but choose to ignore it because seeing eye to eye with a believer is something you deem to be below you.

The passage from Luke is the end of a subsection where the apostles are arguing about who is the greatest and discussing whether or not people outside the "cool kids group" should be rebuked. Sort of like the differences between denominations.

Pretty simple lesson, really. Too bad you're choosing to ignore it.

I'm still waiting for an acknowledgement that you dishonestly presented a quote-mined article as fact, a list of which verses are unequivocally literal, which are unequivocally metaphor and why, and an explanation of how your religion isn't just superstitious tribalism (tribalism which is acknowledged in your cited passages). I don't mind waiting for another year (or longer) for an acknowledgment of your blatant hypocrisy in this thread.

the US Federal government. To see their behavior in a less restrictive environment, read the early history of Nauvoo, Illinois.