LogFAQs > #877074144

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, Database 1 ( 03.09.2017-09.16.2017 ), DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Here is why I think Christianity is a bad ideology
Saloonist 04/12/17 6:00:37 PM #139:	darkphoenix181 posted... Saloonist posted... None of that suggests that they were founding a new religion or saw it as such. The old law being fulfilled doesn't mean that it's discarded or insignificant. The New Covenant is just a development from it. The earliest Christians were Jews. They would never say they were abandoning their religion. Quite the opposite. They believed that they were more in conformity with the promises of the old religion than those who rejected Jesus could ever hope to be. What do you define a religion as? If you mean they still followed Jehovah, then yes they held that belief. However religion is usually defined as practices and beliefs which widely changes when Jesus gave the new law. First and foremost there was no more animal sacrifices, the very key and important ritual of the Jewish religion. And the sermon on the mount details the giant shift in beliefs from hating and wanting to kill enemies like the Phillistines in the OT to loving your enemies and trying to save them. A religion is often whatever the practitioners make of it. The original Christians did not believe they were founding a new religion. That is a fact. Why should I take the word of their competitors as evidence on the truth of that claim? The Jews in those days, just like today, could barely agree on anything among themselves. They hardly seem authoritative on the issue. We can say the same about other Christian movements. Most Mormons would probably say Mormonism is just a development of Christianity and not a new religion. Why should we reject their view of it? Just because more Christians reject Mormonism as a new religion, doesn't say anything about the truth of that accusation. --- BasileosPetros, KhanofKhans, CokeZero, and many more <cite>Saloonist posted [p:877074144] in Here is wh... [t:75226330]...</cite> <quote><cite>darkphoenix181 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Saloonist posted...</cite> <quote>None of that suggests that they were founding a new religion or saw it as such. The old law being fulfilled doesn't mean that it's discarded or insignificant. The New Covenant is just a development from it. The earliest Christians were Jews. They would never say they were abandoning their religion. Quite the opposite. They believed that they were more in conformity with the promises of the old religion than those who rejected Jesus could ever hope to be.</quote> What do you define a religion as? If you mean they still followed Jehovah, then yes they held that belief. However religion is usually defined as practices and beliefs which widely changes when Jesus gave the new law. First and foremost there was no more animal sacrifices, the very key and important ritual of the Jewish religion. And the sermon on the mount details the giant shift in beliefs from hating and wanting to kill enemies like the Phillistines in the OT to loving your enemies and trying to save them.</quote> A religion is often whatever the practitioners make of it. The original Christians did not believe they were founding a new religion. That is a fact. Why should I take the word of their competitors as evidence on the truth of that claim? The Jews in those days, just like today, could barely agree on anything among themselves. They hardly seem authoritative on the issue. We can say the same about other Christian movements. Most Mormons would probably say Mormonism is just a development of Christianity and not a new religion. Why should we reject their view of it? Just because more Christians reject Mormonism as a new religion, doesn't say anything about the truth of that accusation. --- BasileosPetros, KhanofKhans, CokeZero, and many more</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1