Monday, October 31, 2005
Christianity and the primordial ooze
Brew brought up an interesting point which I think can merit a bit of delving.
Collectively the members of this blog adhere to a fairly strict set of “guidelines” established without an ecclesiastical hierarchy. We all agree that through the diligent searching of Biblical texts the “church” as we recognize it is set up in a good way.
During the Crusades, Exploration (insert conquering) of new worlds, and various other tumultuous times throughout the “Church” (note: C, big C) history. During these eras Christianity was spread much in the same way as Islam and that’s by conquering the guys who didn’t believe the same thing.
Though it’s been proven time and time again that the four gospels are as accurate as they could be having in some cases only being written a decade after the crucifixion if not sooner that bad stuff has happened in the besmirched name of God.
In bypassing the historical “Church” do we have the right to claim a new “church” based on the evolution of the practitioners of this sect of the modern church?
My point is this. I don’t consider the faith of those who enacted the crusades, witch hunts and other murderous activities a part of my “church” because of their perception of of Biblical texts. Those folks followed a man not the words, actions and deeds of the Son of Man.