All people are religious

[1John]

We all live according to the beliefs which we hold. In other words we living according to our religion.

George Macdonald (1824-1905) once wrote

"To hold to a doctrine or an opinion with the intellect alone is not to believe it. A man's real belief is that which he lives by."

The athiest and the agnostic live according to their religions, they are just as religious as the Hindu or Christian. They live according to their beliefs (their religion).


If we really believe in freedom we must support freedom of religion. In other words, true freedom of speech.

True freedom of religion means the right to say and argue the following:

All religions are the same or

All religions are false including the religions of Athiesm or

My religion is right and all other religions are wrong


True freedom of religion means the freedom to say such things and argue your case, but it never means trying to enforce society as a whole to adopt a particular belief system through the instrumentality of the government.

The Government is there to keep law and order, if someone calls himself a Christian but throws a grenade through a shop window, he should be imprisoned, as should the Muslim if he does such things.

This is how the government limits freedom of religion. Freedom of religion will always be limited by governments. If my religion teaches me that it is ok to take the law into my own hands and kill none believers, my freedom of religion will be more limited than those religions which teach peace.

If we do not break the law we have nothing to fear except those who would take away freedom of religion.

[Nonson]

1John,

Your premise is drawn from whackos. No rational person believes such infantile dribble. Never have, never will.

There is a thing called a world. On it there are an incredible number of things. For general thought purposes we refer to them as objects. It is these multitudes of objects that constitute reality. By this I mean "FACT'.

Your conclusions are nothing more than unsupportable inferences. Why? Because they contain no facts. This, however, is nothing new.

Nonson

[This message has been edited by Nonson (edited 05 January 2001).]

[Nonson]

Religion: a service to, and a worship of a G-d.

It is fully a communion of the spirit of man with the spirit of G-d. How is this service or worship curtailed by a government?

A dissemination of one's religious beliefs is not a service or worship of G-d. Its called proselytism. Or, simply, a search for those who will share one's beliefs. This act is somewhat limited by democratic governments in that it might possibly by a means by which the state is undermined. It is a rational alternative to outright banning such activity.

There appears no end to mis-information.

Nonson

[1John]

Dear Nonson,

Every one will worship God as they see fit, it is a personal thing. However, this worship implies actions. A Muslim for example might consider it an act of worship to kill someone who burns a Quran or insults the Prophet Mohammed (to him this might be a very personal thing, he may claim that nothing brings him closer to God, as he believes he is doing God's will). Now if someone considers this an act of worship the state will have to limit such expressions of ones religious beliefs.

If a Muslim wishes to say that Christianity is false and Jesus is just a prophet, I will defend his right to say it because I believe that we ought to have freedom of religion and Christ taught that you cannot convert anyone by force.


It is true that religion is a very personal thing. But it is something which is expressed by what we say and do.

Christians are told to tell others the good news about Jesus, this is part of being a Christian. To say that a person should not do such things is the same as saying there ought not be any Christians.

Laws are there to keep the wackos in line. Christians value freedom of religion, I value my right to tell others that they need Christ and I value there right to tell me to get lost.

True freedom of religion means tolerance, it means tolerating those who say, "you are wrong" and letting them go about argueing their case. If a person tries to stop someone from telling others that they have the truth, it is clear that they do not believe in freedom of religion. Now I'm not talking about stopping them by proving them wrong in an argument. I'm all for that, I'm talking about the kind of stopping which tries to implement laws which stop people speaking freely.

People who believe that laws ought to be implemented to stop people proselytising, haven't really thought about what is involved. If we were to follow such laws to there final conclusion we would have to outlaw anyone from claiming that they have the best product, or from advertising their product, or letting people know about a football game etc. because all such claims are simply saying we have something good, something better, come and see. Now this is what the Christians are doing, we are saying that no one is better than God who became a man. No one has sacrificed more and no one loves more. What is so awful about that?

People can be surprisingly prejudiced. Before you right back, I suggest you look up prejudice in the dictionary. Most people use it without knowing what it actually means.

As far as wackos go, G.K. Chesterton said that George Macdonald was one of the 3 or 4 greatest men of the 19th Century. I think you could learn a thing or two from George MacDonald. He was a true Christian.

[Nonson]

Complete Works of George MacDonld

The Light Princess

The Wise Woman

The History of Gutta-Percha-Willie, The Working Genius

Adela Cathcart Volume One

Adela Cathcart Volume Two

Adela Cathcart Volume Three

The Portent

The Cruel Painter

The Castle

The Wow O' Riven aka The Bell

The Broken Swords

The Gray Wolf

Uncle Cornelius His Story

Hope of the Gospel

The Miracles of Our Lord

Heather and Snow

Far Above Rubies

Unspoken Sermons

Unspoken Sermons Second Series

Unspoken Sermons


Is this the George MacDonald of which you speak?

[Nonson]

1John,

You are presumptious if nothing else. It must come from the Sunday School classes, huh?

Anyway your tendency to expand and to distort is, as a trait, should be placed in the keeping of a good disciplinarian. It might works wonders with keeping you within the discreet bounds of the subject matter.

By way of explanation:

Worship: reverence paid to a Divine Being. To what degree are you willing to expand this simple definition? How great will be your distortion of it?

Religious obligations: those things imputed by a Divine Being, and concealed in the Creation. One must exercise caution here, or one might swiftly become a fanatic. There is no command of G-d for a believer to impale another being with a spear of religious beliefs. Each person is given a measure of faith upon being created, and said person is in no need of a holy word pusher. Dissemination is a tricky affair which ought to be under the control of a non-biased party.

Freedom to pursue religious obligations:

Dissemination of religious beliefs must come under the watchful eye of the civil law enforcement agencies, and the activety must be constrained to the limits of decency.

Prejudices:

This social poison is unavoidable, and is all the more the reason why one should proceed with care in the spreading of one's religious beliefs. For, at best, one is going to be mis-understood ard/or mis-interpreted by everyone hearing the message. The worse, which occurs all too often, is argument, conflict, mental and emotional abuse, physical harm.

Religionists, especially christian and muslim, are a dangerous lot in that they feel they havea G-d-given right and duty to force their beliefs upon others. Too,they both feel they have been ordered by their G-ds to conquer the world, and to rule over all thereon.

Nonson



[This message has been edited by Nonson (edited 06 January 2001).]

[1John]

"Religionists, especially christian and muslim, are a dangerous lot in that they feel they havea G-d-given right and duty to force their beliefs upon others. Too,they both feel they have been ordered by their G-ds to conquer the world, and to rule over all thereon. " Nonson

Dear Nonson,

Where do you get these strange ideas? "Conquer the world", do any Christians out there read this in their New Testament? Maybe I'm just not looking hard enough!

Here is a little verse from the Quran: it is called the verse of the sword.

009.123
YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him.


By the way Nonson, you have included an incomplete list of George MacDonalds books. Most of the books you have included are specifically written for children. Have you read any of his books for adults? Have you ever read a book of MacDonalds compiled and edited by Michael Philips called "Knowing the heart of God"? There is a particular chapter in it called "A family of peacemakers".

Yes, it is true that some who call themselves 'Chirstian' stir up a lot of unecessary strife, but the Bible does not teach this. What by the way do you call yourself?


And also while we are at it. What is meant when some people are said to worship money or "their god is their stomach"?

All people are religious. All people worship God or a god. There is no such thing as a person who does not worship something. Since you are such a MacDonald buff you might like to read a book called "The Ladies Confession". There is a brilliant sermon in there about people and there gods.