Okay, so this subject has come up a lot, especially with Raf who admittedly is very passionate about it.
Should we hold religions accountable for the actions of their ancestors? Meaning, should Christians still 'pay' for what Christians 500 years ago did in the name of their religion? Or should religious folks hold their past in a certain regard?



My argument is this:
We shouldn't hold them accountable for what they did in the past no more than we should hold every single white man accountable for what they did to the Native Americans. Most of us are not evil murderers and most Christians really aren't oppressive demons .
What I do think has to happen is that religious folks don't deny that their religion has a shaky, violent past. This means just agreeing that what happened before does reflect on them now and it is important in context with what is going on today. What some religious people are doing today is not that different from what they were doing 500 years ago.

What do you think?

Religion is the biggest causer of wars, yet I believe people are entitled to their own, no matter how far-fetched or crazy it may be. But, I don't like them not admitting that their religions may have caused one or two stirs in the past...

Well, now that Shaun has managed to clarify his thoughts, I agree. The mistakes in the past should be avoided.

Raf, just to be clear, I am in no way against you believing what you believe and I have never at any point thought you were some evil Christian running around enslaving blacks, killing 'witches', etc. I know you're not. I'm only against the use of religion for evil, which sadly, happens a lot, and is happening today.

Would you say, Raf, that to avoid the past, one has to acknowledge that your religion was involved? I understand you're of a different sect, but the skeletal structure of your sect is still the same as way back when, so you're not at fault, but you certainly have a past. So, I dunno, I'm just trying to spark a sort of discussion of religious history.

What's all this about Raf's religion?

He and I disagreed on some points before and I think some of it was a misunderstanding between both of us.

Ah... I'll just... leave, then.

Well...my sect states:

1) Separation of Church and state
2) Free will of the people to beleive
3) Salvation throught God's grace, not of works
4) No meditator between God and Man
5) Something about sticking to what the Bible says.
(There's more, but I forget...)

...so, the skeletal structure really doesn't tie in with what happened in the past, cuz' our Declaration of Faith prevents any form of violence (thou shalt not kill) or using religion as a way to bring in money (in Acts, someone died cuz' of that), etc.

And I agree with the fact that some Christians are over-doing it. God just told us to do our part, not play God by ordering people what to do. We can try to advise them, but we cannot ram things down their throat. We also can't think of ourselves any higher than others, cuz' if I recall, most of us were just as bad (or even worse in my case) before we chose God.

I also agree that my sect has a past, and we Baptists try to avoid doing anything that can make people point at us and say we're doing what the blood-thirsty Christians are doing. And, well. sinc my sect wasn't delcared offically a sect until the 1600's, we really haven't had much of a chance to mess up or be involved with any bloodshed.

So, yeah...glad you're being clear

Edit: wow...I'm a slow poster...

Sounds reasonable enough, Rif-Raf.

Rif-Raf

I like it!