" I know I am saying there are Catholics who say "I am a Catholic but I must disagree with the Church to be a Christian" they are not Catholic if they think that "

Yes, right I think Yell. But those people aren't very common or Christians or anything I think.

> Muppet wrote:

> You're basically saing that we can have religions but no-one can follow them. That's pointless. Modernising religion is not losing sight of it, my view is that it is applying values of a religion to a context of today. That is preserving it I think.

-yes people can follow them, you SHOULD follow them, i'm all for that and follow my religion as well, but what i'm saying is we can't represent themselves because other than assumptions we don't really know what it means to be a part of that religion.. and some of the values you have injected into that religion might be one of the things you need to be a part of that religion, we don't know so we can't assume, we can only say we believe in X religion, not that  I AM X religion --cuz you don't know what it means--
and that's everything but preserving it, the next generation will apply their own values, they lived in a different environment than their parents they will apply their own values, and where will it end? i'm not saying we can't apply our own values, that is what might've been the intention of religion but we simply don't know or atleast can't assume

"The One Upstairs" is going to look more kindly on us who are Christians if we actually act as Christians and declare ourselves so. He won't be very pleased if we say: Oh let's just chuck the towel in. No-one's perfect so who cares?    Jesus didn't die for nothing. He died to forgive us all our sins, be they the fact that we, being human, cannot always live up to everything he set us.
- that's the mentality that might make religions diss-appear, the man upstairs will forgive us, it's ok --everything's guna be fine
now i'm not saying he won't but you don't know for sure, so you can't assume that either 
"He won't be very pleased" you are NO ONE to judge what God will like or what he won't like, i know i'm guilty of doing this too, i say other people will prlly go to hell but the truth is we are NO ONE to judge that --in the famous words of Tupac Shakur: Only God can judge me!-

I see your points, Gladiator, but you're kind of trying to give us a viewpoint of something that you don't fully understand. (Please forgive my ignorance if you have infact been of a religious denomination. I know someone in here said that they had, but I can't remember who.)
-yes what i'm saying is very vague
what i'm basically saying though is, we can not assume --simple i guess
and yeh i'm not the one who suddenly came up with this idea, i was convinced of it by someone..

And of course, anyone who declares themslef a Christian and then goes and intentionally acts otherwise is certainly not a christian. Actions speak louder than words!
-"anyone who declares themslef a Christian and then goes and intentionally acts otherwise " first of all, you don't know what it means to be christian, you can only assume based on interpretations that might or might not be true, secondly since you don't know for certain who is christian you can not say who's not christian, and thirdly again you're no one to judge who's who, and who's sinned or who hasn't

>>other than assumptions we don't really know what it means to be a part of that religion.. <<

So you're speaking only about certain religions? Which ones? We've explained at length that many religions make it very clear what it means to follow them.

Which is why you seem absolutely ridiculous and uneducated.

You have no idea what you're talking about, but post on and on you do. Catholics have basic fundamental beliefs. Many religions do. Members of those religions will readily tell you that people who do not share those beliefs do not share their religion. As much as you want to think you're ready to get a PhD because you have this BRILLIANT idea, you just haven't educated yourself.

> Gladiator wrote:

> "Every real Catholic"
and you decide who the real ones are?

"Um... we do. It's just you with the problem."
all we have our assumptions of interpretations and everyone interepts them differently

i'm talking about all religions

<

Again, it was after all humans that brought the word(s) here, and made their own interpretations on it. So why cant we? Provided we know enough background information and whatnot

>>it's simple as this, you or me can not judge who is part of a religion and who isn't --that's just taking ourself into the position of God which is extremely diss-respectufull<<

How does God come into play here? You can bring up God and call something disrespectful, but you're still not making any sense. Religions are socially defined and constructed. The people who created/take part in religions define them. They define their dogma and doctrine. They make up the religion and determine what standards there are for their religion. Maybe everyone who accepts Jesus as their "personal Lord and Savior" is a member. Maybe only those who believe in the trinity and follow certain moral practices is a member. These standards are determined by the communities of religions who make up those religions.

Religions did not come to humanity from God. They are constructed by people, made up of the people who take part in them in whatever structure the religion has set up (by human beings, not God). As such, they can decide whatever they want to be their beliefs. And they can decide how closely one must follow those beliefs, however specifically, in order to accept that person as a member of their religious tradition.

The question is, who are you to tell them they can't determine what constitutes their religion?

>>now on the basis we judge these people to be religous or not are just someone's interpretations<<

No they're not. Religions have set forth the standards by which they define themselves. Some people just don't meet those standards. It's not a matter of interpretation.

>>omeone who is very religous and very devoted but his interpretations will be different from another person because some of the factors that play a role in his interpretations<<

Such a person, if their "interpretations" are at odds with a religion's doctrine, is probably not a member of that religious community. He/she may be a part of the broader community, such as a nondenominational Christian, but if he/she has significantly different doctrine than the Catholics or various Protestant faiths, then he/she is not a member of those religious communities, while still being a nondenominational Christian. But Christian is not Catholic or one of the various Protestant faiths; they have doctrine, and if someone does not agree with that doctrine, then they're not a member of that tradition.

>>SURE, his interpretations could be true, they could really be the exact points of that religion<<

And there's NO ONE better to judge this than the members of that religion's community. And they all have doctrine. Whatever a person's interpretations are, if they are not the interpretations of that religion, then the person is following some other faith than that religion. Religions are socially constructed (for the 900th time). I don't know if you're talking about divine revelation when you use the word "true" here, but regardless, if a person's interpretation is not that of a religion, then the religion will not identify the person as a member of their religious tradition/community. A person can call themself ANYthing they want. I can call myself a devout Muslim. But that doesn't mean anything. Muslim clerics wouldn't call me Muslim. And they'd be totally right.

>>but we DO NOT know that for certain, we can only assume that<<

Yes we do. Many religions publish literature making their doctrine as clear as you could possibly want to know it. Since they decide what constitutes their religion, this is essentially working with the purest, most certain facts about those religions as possible.

>>, but we should not say this is our religion<<

Unless, of course, we actually accept the doctrine of that religion and it is, in fact, our religion?

You're a nondenominational Christian? You keep mentioning God and his role in judgement as if it has anything to do with this thread. You can be a nondenominational Christian. Everyone has their own interpretations. And since they're just bread and butter Christians, that works. But nondenominational Christians are not Catholics. They are not Lutherans. They are not Presbyterian. They know it and so do members of those faiths. It's not a matter of judging someone to examine their doctrine and see where it is the same/is not the same as someone else's.