Realism or brutality – has

NY Daily News ^ | February 18, 2004 | TAMER EL-GHOBASHY and CORKY SIEMASZKO

[af_vet_1981]

Not the Roman Empire, per se, but a political entity that was relatively tolerant of non-official sects/cults. Whatever else you want to accuse the Romans of, you have to admit that they were pretty tolerant of a variety of religions within the Empire. Certainly much more tolerant than when Christianity became the official religion of the Empire.

Rome would accept any religion except the G-d of Israel. He was their enemy because He is exclusive, the only G-d. Those who worshipped Him did not bow the knee to Caesar.

To say that Christianity would have survived if it first arose in non-Roman Germania or within the Persian Empire is to ignore reality. Only under tolerant Pax Romana could Jesus' followers expect anything other than a noose.

Yeshua's followers were supposed to expect martyrdom and divine deliverance. They were not supposed to make a deal with the Empire in order to synthesize and become the first of many religions in Rome. Every story in the Torah and Tenach is full of brave men and women totally outnumbered who relied on the G-d of Israel and his messengers. You could just as well argue that Moses needed the Egyptian Empire to make the difficult journey to the land of Canaan in peace.

Of course your point of view is totally embraced in secular history and from that viewpoint it makes sense.

[af_vet_1981]

How is it not? At the end of the day, every religion (including ones no longer with us, such as Mithraism) claims to know the Truth. At base, the validity of a religion can only be judged by the number of adherents of that religion.

That is the modern secular view. The one with the most marbles or money wins. Truth is relative and subjective, etc.

[Modernman]

Rome would accept any religion except the G-d of Israel. He was their enemy because He is exclusive, the only G-d. Those who worshipped Him did not bow the knee to Caesar.

The Romans had no problem accepting any religion that did not oppose the rule of the Caesars. Christians exhibited a high level of arrogance- they were a minority attempting to force their views upon the majority. In such a context, the Romans were perfectly in the right to crucify Jesus. He was nothing more than a radical trying to stir up trouble.

[af_vet_1981]

She did more than state an opinion, she made an assertion of fact ( it's not historically accurate,), which she makes no effort to back up. Opinions are a dime a dozen. But just because you have a right to one does not make it of necessity valid or accurate.

No, she did not back it up. You accused her of parroting someone else's views and she moved on. You won that fight ...

[Modernman]

That is the modern secular view. The one with the most marbles or money wins. Truth is relative and subjective, etc.

No, for a religion to be more than a cult, it must resonate with a large group of people. Why would an omniscient god create a religion that people will not accept?

Actually, if a religion does not get a lot of marbles and money, it goes extinct. Whatever Truth it purported to bring to the world dies out. Any religion that wants to survive must therefore adapt to reality.

[af_vet_1981]

No, for a religion to be more than a cult, it must resonate with a large group of people. Why would an omniscient god create a religion that people will not accept? Actually, if a religion does not get a lot of marbles and money, it goes extinct. Whatever Truth it purported to bring to the world dies out. Any religion that wants to survive must therefore adapt to reality.

You make the secular argument. It has many points that appeal to modern man. The only obstacle is the G-d of Israel. You cannot include Him in the synthesis of the human evolution of religions.

[stuartcr]

Do you really think God will punish this person to an eternity of suffering and pain...just because of the way she believes here on earth for her 70 or 80 years of life?

[stuartcr]

I do believe the number of adherents validates a religion...but it doesn't validate the tenets of that religion....that, I believe, is not possible.

[TheGunny]

Definitely! I didnt say it, God did. "Jesus IS the WAY the TRUTH and the LIFE, NO MAN COMES TO THE FATHER EXCEPT THORUGH HIM!!!

[stuartcr]

OK

[stuartcr]

Going to hell, eternal punishment and pain ...just because of one's beliefs...isn't this the same punishment a serial killer or mass murderer would get?

[TheGunny]

Yes, the only sin that cant/ wont be forgiven is the disbelief in the person and Deity and sacrifice of Jesus.
The serial killer or pedophile will indeed be better off in eternity than you if they, before they die, confess their sin,repent and accept Jesus as lord. The "son of Sam" has in fact been born again so his reward is assured.

[stuartcr]

OK, thanks