[lit-ideas] Re: Comparative religion

>Can a religion be a religion if it is not exclusionary?
>If it does not  declare doom for any who do not follow
>its particular set of beliefs? Divisiveness is the very
>Hallmark of Christianity -- Baptists declare Methodists  not worthy,
>Pentecostals declare Baptists not worthy.....it's My Truth or No Truth.....

Well, get a clue, guy, we Quakers are religious, and we're not like that at 
all. I've been a card-carrying Quaker since 1987, and nobody has ever asked 
me what I believe in. I've been associated long-term with Quaker monthly 
meetings in Redwood City, California, Providence, Rhode Island, 
Minneapolis, Minnesota, and Orange County, California. While traveling I 
have visited Quaker meetings in Canada, Australia, Hong Kong, England, you 
name it. In all these years, I have yet to have any other Quaker ask me 
whether I believe in the existence of God -- or ask me *any other* stupid 
tricky faith-based know-the-truth question.

Yes, a religion can be a religion without being exclusionary. Yes, there is 
no reason why a religion needs to declare doom for any who do not follow 
its particular set of beliefs. There's no reason why a religion *needs* to 
have any particular set of beliefs -- religious people need faith, not 
belief. Divisiveness is indeed the very Hallmark of Christianity, and yet, 
I know a whole bunch of Quakers who consider themselves to be Christians. 
Just a whole bunch!

How could you be as old as you are without having found out about this? Are 
you a slow learner? Run, do not walk, to your nearest Quaker meeting.



------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: