I found it very revealing to read through all your posts. I have to admit that I skimmed quite a few though, but I got the general points of view quite clearly.

I have my own example of religion in the family.
My brother Mark was never very religious, but then he read a book about the devil and became really really scared. It is generally believed between my siblings and me that he just wanted to protect himself by any means necessary - and then he found out that sacraments act sort of like shields. Sooo guess what he did. He met a woman - girl really, she was 21 and he was 14 years older at the time - "met" is a strong word. She saw his picture in some girly magazine because he had taken part in something called "the hottest astrosingles" sometime earlier. He is good looking and the photographers just asked him in a cafe he was willing to earn a few bucks and took his picture. So they met via this magazine, and married fairly quickly. Mind you, this marriage was solely for the sacrament - not because he really loved her (or that is my interpretation) It did not last long, and currently my brother is in the process of anulling the whole thing. It takes about 3 years for the whole churchlaw trial to go through and it looks promising.

My brother is fanatically religious to the point that it drives everybody crazy - and drove his wife away. He goes to church every day if he can but is totally unsocial at the same time. His arguments are all really intellectual and he reads a ton of books on theology and whatnot, but it is impossible to really have a good debate about religion with him because he is fanatic and a fundamentalist catholic. And pigheaded lol but I still love him.

I find it in general very problematic to debate religion at all, because what you believe does define who you are. To tell someone that what he bases his whole actions on is wrong does not simply question wether he likes blue or red better, it attacks every moral value and every ethical decision that person makes, made or will make in the future, how he'll raise his children etc. It is no wonder that people sometimes fight to the death for this very reason, it attack integrity and honour. I think everybody should just do whatever he wants, if you believe in god or not should be a private decision and not be allowed to be judged by others at all. Whatever happens after we die nobody knows for sure anyway, so it is a waste of energy to debate wether someone is allowed in heaven or not or if paradise exists or not etc.

And then, your debates about the bible and specific text passages or what kind of god god really is are really not going anywhere at all. The bible in itself is not a book that suddenly appeared. It is a conglomerate of texts that come from different periods of time, and especially the old testament has different version of god. Monotheism did not suddenly spring up, it evolved as well, and there is no contradiction in the old testament when god appears as wrathful in some passages and totally different in others. It is not infact the same god at all but two different gods. Every theology 101 student learns that - and I met some and asked them about it. Furthermore, the bible has been translated, copied wrongly and thus altered so manytimes over time that solely textbased debates are ridiculous anyway. Nothing in the bible can be taken literal but has to be interpreted.
Some historical context is useful while reading the old testament, and that can be used to analyze the moral questions that arise. It is impossible to answer questions regarding morality with one general allcovering revelation. Like I said, those incidents have to be treated seperatedly - and interpreted with historical and cultural context in mind.

I have to point out though, that despite all the horrible things that happened under churche rule during the ages, the church has accomplished many great things as well. Charity - in fact, that was the reason why bishops had power in ancient rome starting in the 4th century, because they had "control" over a large portions of christians that lived in the city. Roman gentry generally lived in the countryside and did not have a powerbasis in the cities. Correlation of power and religion started very early..
Hospitals in the middle ages were mostly run by monasteries or nunneries, schools and university itself developed because the church needed skilled people and pushed those institutions. There were many great saints that did great things and convinced people to follow their example because they lived what they preached themselves.

Personally, I have a problem with institutionalized religion because it is so intricatly connected with political power and ambition, and I think those two should stay absolutely seperate. I can lead a good christian life without believing in some mammoth catholic church that only manifested itself as a institution about 1000 years after Jesus was crucified.

Ha....sounds like another RC I know of.  I've known quite a few in my life although most RC are not like this.   I was once a RC but do not agree with their theology.   But that's another whole story. 

So you don't believe in Jesus?  The reason I ask is because he didn't believe our decision should be private.  In fact he said quite the opposite.  He said to "let your light shine among men."  He also said not to "hide your light under the bed."  He also said to "go out and tell others and make disciples to those who wish to believe."   

Have you ever read the OT book of Judges?  The main theme of the book (very interesting read) is that everyone did what was right in their own eyes.  Pretty miserable time period.   I know what's going to happen after I die.  Absolutely.  So that's not true. 

Eternity is a long time to be wrong.  So you'd better be right.  Good luck with that. 

The bible is quite organized.  Have you even really read and studied the OT?  I know it quite well and can assure you that there is only one God visible throughout both Old and New Testaments.  Monotheism started with Genesis 1:1.  In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.  Of course not too much later we start to see the beginning of false worship of other gods and polytheism began to spring up.  So, basically it started out with monotheism, then evolved (thru man's rebellion against God) to polytheism before God spoke to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as the one true God. 

I've been studying the bible for over 40 years and has brought me thru many diff religions over the years.  I can assure you that the bible you hold in your hands today is very accurate and trustworthy.  It has not been copied wrongly as others have told you.  This is a fallocy that has evolved as well.  There are more original copies of the bible (over 5,000) than any other works of antiquity.  Nothing comes remotely close.  So if you take the theology 101 student's take, you might want to listen to someone who has much more knowledge than that.   You're getting some really bad information.  It's sort of like gossip.  Can you really trust it? 

The bible is quite easily taken literally.  You complain on one hand about religious institutions who interpret their own way but then you turn around and agree with them.  The reason we have so much error out there isn't because of the error of the bible, but because of the error of man's many interpretations.  If you take the bible literally, it all falls into place.  The lie that the bible has to be interpreted by man is a lie from the pit of hell.....reminds me of Satan in the garden to Eve...."did God really say?"  That's Demonology 101..........take the word of God and twist it so they can't understand it. 

Actually the RCC got its start before that.  OF course to the Catholics (to be fair) would say it starts with St. Peter.  But there is no evidence but their say so or their tradition.  Many historians would put the beginning of the RCC with Constantine who declared Christianity the state religion of Rome in about 323 A.D.  I believe that's about right. 

You can't lead a Christian life without the Word of God.  Yes, an organization isn't going to get you into heaven, but the Word of God is instrumental in a believer's conversion.  There are three elements in every believer's conversion.....the Holy Spirit, the Word of God and the soul winner. 

Direct your brother to a best seller called "The Case For Christ" and another called "The Case For Faith"  Both written by Lee Strobel.  It's everywhere and has been around for quite a while.  Two very interesting books you both might be interested in reading. 

Yes my brother is roman catholic. The funny thing is that he found his faith or whatever he has when hew as around 30. Before that he never even knew where the nearest church was.

But I disagree with you historically on the account of the OT and the origin of the catholic church.

It is true that Constantine declared that christians should not be punished or presecuted, but it was in fact not he who declared christianity a state religion but another emperor after him. There is alot of debate about Constantine's motivation and it is really complex so I won't get into it in detail. Some say it was a political ploy to secure power and stabilize the roman empire which had huge problems in the 4th century bc, and that Constantine was not a christian himself but worshipped a form of Apollo, the sungod. That is supposedly where sunday as the day of worship originates. Others claim he was a christian and fulfilled an oath he took after he had a vision of a golden cross before a decisive battle against his CoConsul at the time and concerted to christianity afterwards. If you ask me, Constantine was not really a very good man, he killed his own wife and son for treason.

The church as an institution though took a very long time to manifest as the Roman catholic church with its HQ in Rome. There was hardly unity among the early christians, and huge portions of Europe remained pagan and it took a long time until Christianity took firmly root. I grew up where christian irish monks first started to convert germanic tribes north of the alps. There are some really old monasteries there from the 8th century. Charles the great did alot to unify the church, did you know that? He added and influenced the way church services were held, he wanted priests to wear special gowns and to add more pomp to make it more glorious and interesting - or so I have read. He unified the monestaries under his rule and passed a law that each monestary was required to have at least one bible in it - in the 9th century. Before that most monks had never even read the scripture themselves. It took then another 2 centuries until the roman catholic church started to appear as a coherent organization, before that it was basically just wandering priests or monks that preached whatever version they believed. There was no canon or dogma.

Genesis 1 was written during israelite captivity in Babylon. The babylonians believed in gods that viewd mankind as abomination. Genesis 1 was basically a dichotomic world construct to the babylonian one. In their version god created man as his crown achievement. At least that is what my teacher taught us in school. So it may be at the beginning of the bible in the pentateuch but that does not automatically mean that it was written first. I have to admit though that I did not really read all of the old testament. I know most important stories though and I really like the book of Ruth - its my name.

Personally, I am religious if not overly pious. I constantly have my brother in mind who is fundamentally pious but not a very good christian if you ask me. My mother is very religious and her faith has helped her to be strong. She is the strongest person I know. I have never seen her read the bible though. No time - I have 5 siblings. One of my aunts ran away with 16 to join a nunnery in rome and we talked about religious topics often at home, mostly after church on sunday when we were having brunch. I believe that there is alot of wisdom to be found in the bible, no doubt, and it is possible to lead a good and just life by that. I would never discredit this, but not everything in the bible was meant to be taken literally. The story of Job for example, god and satan making a bet? Comeon, that is clearly not meant litererally but allegorically. I stand by what I said about the OT being something that is comprised of texts from different times and contexts. That does not mean that there is no organization.

For the NT, not everybody knew how to write during the middle ages after all, and if a copist was sloppy he wrote down something wrong and the next person who copied from him took over his mistake.. that is just one example. The new testament was translated from greece to latin to german to english to other languages. Translation is tricky and meaning shifts very subtely. I know because english is not my native language - german is.

I am from Germany, and religion here is different from anything in the states anyway. Church communities don't really exist the way they do in the US, which I really like. People help each other out, know everybody and really are a community. If youre new in town the first place to look for is a church - youll find new friends quickly. I have been an exchange student for a year in Iowa in a really small town new Mason City (Sheffield), and it had 5 churches. And everybody went to church to meet friends or to do chat aferwards. I am not sure how many really really went there because they wanted to meet god, but it was a ritual that held the town together.

I find it really interesting to exchange knowledge and to debate about such things as religion but it is a very dicy topic. For example, I don't believe that homosexuals should be condemned by pastors in church. I find that bigoted. But I assume that you have a different oppinion on that and it is probably a good way to start a fierce argument. This argument could then easily branch out into every aspect of personality and character that the respective people have, basically ending in trashin each others. That is what I mean with arguing about religion being so difficult, because it not just something that is detached from who you are and can be anaylized neutrally.

My sister has a babyboy, 9months old now. Her husband is an atheist - much to the chagrin of my mom. The difficult issue is baptizing the baby. My sister wants to, her husband doesn't. My mom thinks that if her husband is an atheist and does not believe and finds evereything religious humbug he should not actually care. For him it would just be a silly ritual pouring water of the babies head etc. and nothing more. Now what do you do in such a case? Her husband grew up in communist east germany and it really shows in such instances.

I see all sorts of problems here......biblically speaking.  First off, a believer is told to marry another believer.  We are to be equally yoked for a reason.  They've already started their marriage on bad footing.  They are two people going in diff directions.  One will drag the other and it's not beneficial for the household.  Sooner or later this can very easily tear them apart. 

Second of all I don't believe in infant baptism.  The bible is clear, repent and be baptized.  There is no instance of infant baptism in the bible.   I think it's a personal decision that no one can make for another.  I believe the whole RCC baptism is nothing but brainwashing and fear right from the get go.  I was baptised as a RC btw.  I was later baptized by immersion  as an adult which is the way Christ taught us. 

Thirdly, the bible also says that a wife should submit to her husband.  I believe that.  But he is to love her so it's a partnership and done right nothing will take them apart from each other.  Her husband is the head of the household.  I agree with your mother's reasoning tho.  He shouldn't really care if it means nothing.  To me infant baptism does nothing but make the mothers happy and secure but it's a false security.  It means nothing.  Hiter was baptized.  So what? 

My advice to your sister, is to try to submit to her husband and watch what happens.  Men and women are different.  Woman more than anything want to be loved and feel secure.  Men most of all want respect from their families especially their wives.  My guess is if she tries this and says to her husband that she really wants to baptize this baby but she will submit to his wishes, I bet you he'll relent.  It may take a while.  It may not.  But it's respect and honor he wishes and once he gets it, I'm thinking he'll okay this move. 

I've been around alot of communists and had many stay in my home including two girls from Bulgaria who had just come out of communism, one from China and another from Serbia.  We had great discussions leading a few of them to Christ.  They were hungry for knowledge of Christ.   

Your bible history is very wrong.  Not sure where you're getting your information but you haven't got things straight.  For instance Genesis was written by Moses and it was way before the Babylonian captivity.  The captivity was in 586 BC and is very well documented.  You don't even have to have biblical scholars to tell you this.  This is all recorded in secular history as well as biblical. 

Ruth is a great book and full of meaning.  Ruth is a beautiful name and she was portrayed as a beauty.  The whole reason for Ruth was to show the geneology at the end of the story and link Christ with Boaz and Ruth thru the line of David.  It's a great story of a kinsman redeemer with Christ as the shadow behind the story.  He, as you know, is our kinsman redeemer who saved us from a terrible fate just like Boaz did his duty and saved Ruth from hers. 

We're hoping to go to Poland in September to help a little Baptist church there.  It's very very Catholic there and this little church gets alot of persecution from the RCC. 

Well not to me it's not.  I'm not afraid to speak out.  I guess that means I'm getting old.  I realize how short the time is and how little time we have.  We are only guaranteed today.  Tomorrow is not ours necessarily.  We may not have another chance to share the gospel with another. 

No worries here.  I won't argue.  I don't mind a friendly debate but it's not worth arguing over.   I do have a diff opinion but if it makes you uncomfortable I won't share it....but I can tell you  my opinion is biblical because the bible is my plumbline.  You can't take a crooked stick and measure it next to another crooked stick and call it good.  To find out if  your stick is straight you need to take the crooked stick and measure it to one that is perfectly straight. 

Why not?  Job is a great book for anyone who is going thru tough times.  It's put there for a reason.  Many have found solace in reading the book of Job.  I take it literally.  I also take as much of the bible literally as I can so long as it's not obviously poetic or symbolic.  In other words, if it makes sense to take literally, do it.  If not, find out the meaning behind it. 

The bible totally is written by about 40 diff men over a period of 1500 years.  These men came from all diff walks of life.  Some were fishermen, some farmers, some were considered royalty like Moses, Solomon and King David or lived in palaces like Daniel and Nehemiah.  Some were shepherds and others worked for the government.  Just about everyone of them came reluctantly.  It was a hard job to be on God's side of things.  All of them had it very rough.  It wasn't an easy job to walk and work for God.  It still isn't.   Being a Christian isn't for wussies. 

Job is a pretty terrible book since it's all about how Job had his life ruined and his children (and I think wife?) were all killed because god made a bet with the devil.

Anyway time is once again a precious commodity for me (chem exam next thursday complete with a massive section on organic chem), but as far as hell and all that goes - if god really doesn't want anybody to suffer there, why couldn't he simply "deactivate" a soul, or turn hell "off"?  As far as the "only god will let you see" part of your argument goes, many religions state similar things - for example, only Allah can show me the path, depending on who you ask. In a world where hundreds of religions, many of them mere branches of other religions, say they are all the right one, how is anyone to simply pick the right one? Let's take, for example, you and Lulapilgrim. Both of you belong to branches of Christianity. Both of you posit that your particular path is the right one. So which one is right? You both have the same amount of claim - your holy book and holy men say this; her holy book and holy men say that. To an outside observer, neither is particularly convincing.

So why is God asking us to deduce a specific denomination of a specific religion on threat of damnation?

Also as for the other person, the dude needs to chill out. Let the kid get baptized; it'll have no bearings on decisions made later in life. Indoctrination later on may, but even that isn't foolproof. Just let the little bugger realize his or her own destiny. Long as they aren't forcing their beliefs on others or acting in life with cruel intent, meh.

Hmm. I am so not like you, KFC. I never said it is not a good book with good advice in it, just that it is not mean literarry that god and satan sat on a cloud and decided to have a friendly game of chance.

You are probably a evangelist? Now im a RC, most of the time not very, but still. The church as a whole does not persecute other churches. Ecumenical relations between protestant and catholic communities are actually quite strong in Germany. You'll love Poland, though.

It's my belief/opinion, that the Bible...even if you're a dyed in red Christian, is a starting point and shouldn't be taken as literally as it is.

Someone is giving you bad/wrong information. 

The whole point is God says to take literally, but Satan whispers "can you really?" 

FIrst off I don't have any holy men.  I have the word of God and that is my only guide.  Lula's RCC is built upon both the good book and tradition and that's where we get into hot debates.  I'm not interested in the RCC traditions any more than Christ was interested in the Pharisees traditions. 

It's not about my path or Lula's path.  It's about Christ's path.  He said he was the only way, truth and life.  He backed up his words with deeds and actions.  It comes down to do you believe him or not?  Nobody else has ever done what he did and continues to do in the hearts and minds of people today....like mine for instance.  I'm eternally grateful for what he has done in my life.  That's why now I die to myself and live for him.  It's no longer my life but His life that I care about.  I realize now it's not about me and it never really was about me. 

As far as other religions, Christianity stands out.  All other religions are works based, including the RCC but to follow Christ is about a relationship not a religion.  It has never been about religion.  Religion is man centered and man created.  There is nothing but faith in Christ that brings eternal life.  Our works are important but they do not save us.  We were saved to do good works but were not saved by our good works.  Many groups out there are having you working for your salvation and are guilt based.  I can't tell you how many times I've heard a priest tell a young mother her infant  child went to hell because he wasn't baptized.  That's fear and guilt that Christ would never be happy with. 

Well there's more to it than that, just like there was more to Elisha than you thought as well.  God replaced everything twofold and blessed Job abundantly.  Remember God knew beforehand exactly what Job was made of.  He knew Job could handle this testing.  Not many could handle the life of Job but God knew he could because God knew how strong his faith in Him was. 

BTW his wife was not killed.  See how you're making an assumption without knowing all the facts?  That's why you need to read the book or at least hold your opinion on it until you have a better understanding of it.  Also the devil is our accuser.  He accused Job before God saying Job wasn't worth his salt if God took off the hedge of protection.  So God wanting to prove (to us and Job) that Job's faith was strong and sure. He told Satan he would allow Satan to have his way with Job under certain conditions.  Job is a great book of one while going thru trials and tribulations kept his faith in God no matter what.   

Well all Christians are called to be evangelists to some degree because we are told to "go and tell."  So yes, somewhat, although my gift I believe, from God is teaching and discernment.  I love to teach and I see so many that have the wrong perception of God so I guess that keeps me busy. 

I figured you may have been  Eastern Orthodox but wasn't sure.   I was a RC and I know that there is persecution enough to go all around.  We had a pastor's wife who was spit on by a nun because she was Baptist.  This was in Poland.  The Poland RCC is very very powerful and they have very strict rules and taxes against Baptist churches there or any other non RCC.   Most of the real estate is owned by the RCC and the people in powerful positions are usually RCC even the judges.  If they leave the church they are expected to step down from these positions.   My husband has been there to preach and teach.  He met some town leaders who were sneaking to the Baptist Church not wanting the RCC to find out because they seriously can lose their jobs. 

I didn't approach it through any person, I approached it through reason and intellect. There is a lot that can be learned by using the Bible as a starting point, then observing it (and so on) in the world.

The actions of one person does not reflect the general opinion of the vatican towards reform churches. But yea, poland is deepy rooted in catholicism. My mother is from croatia, and everybody there is catholic as well. They are pretty pious there now because itwas forbidden while everything was still yugoslawia. People that went to church risked repercussions. One thing I find good about the RCC is the infrastructure it has with caritas. After the war started in 1990 my parents started organizing humanitarian aid transports for the refugees that fled from the fighting or were driven off their land. It was only possible because they worked together with caritas - you would not believe how complicated making a transport like that happen was back then, just a few years after the fall of communism. You needed official papers for all the border crossings. It is not possible to just collect things and bring them to the people in need, buroucracy has to be correct or heaven help! They still organize smaller ones these days because there are still alot of refugees in croatia that can't go back due to the complicated and messed up situation in Bosnia. Bureaucracy and the partition of the land into 3 zones make it difficult. The priest they work together with and some nuns in a small convent do amazing work, they help so many people regardless of their ethnicity or religion. They always go to the same citiy these days, Slavonski Brod in the region of slavonia. The ground is very fertile there and that is the only thing keeping the population alive. All industry was destroyed in the civil war, no new investors, high unemployment rate and everything is very expensive. So basically, everybody has their own garden, a few animals if they can manage like chicken, maybe a cow and a few pigs - very rural. Most people work as seasonal harvest helpers in Germany and other countries in the EU - backbreaking work for very little money but that is the money they have to do things like repearing something on the house or investing in a tractor etc. I think my parents were donated a few tractors once from a farmer who had bought new ones - they were really happy when that arrived. Without caritas none of this had been possible.