New religion

[DeistPaladin]

Why is it a potential danger?

I thought that was clear but let me go into more detail:

Danger #1. Islamo-Christianity proposes not only that there is a god but that this god is opposed by a devil. The universe is a battle ground between these two opposing sides.

There are only two sides in this "spiritual struggle". There is no "Bob, the Neutral Christ" in either religion. Additionally, the side that serves the good god is well defined in the mind of the fundamentalist. It's always the side of your own religion, of course. After all, Islamo-Christianity is all about "serving God", however their individual sect and denomination may define God.

If they encounter a religion, belief, lifestyle, game or whatever is outside their idea of serving God, it rather narrows it down who these outsiders are serving, doesn't it? It's called process of elimination.

Giving the logic a rundown:
1. Presupposition: Total Powers of the Universe = God and Satan
2. Presupposition: "My religion = serving God"
3. Observation: Group outside my religion
4. Definition: "Not my religion = Not serving God"
5. Process of elimination: "Not serving God = Serving Satan"
6. Conclusion: "Outside group = manipulated by Satan or serving him"

Many Islamo-Christians might not want to take the "reasoning" that far but I hope this breakdown explains why the more extreme fundamentalists cry "Satanism" or "evil" when exposed to a religion, lifestyle, etc. that doesn't fit their narrow views of what is righteous.

Such a worldview doesn't lend itself to tolerance of other religions, apostasy or other outsiders. Further, the conviction of being in the service of God can whitewash any bad behavior. After all, what promotes your religion is promoting the service of God and therefore how could that ever be a bad thing?

Danger #2: Islamo-Christianity proposes that there are two afterlife possibilities: eternal Heaven and eternal Hell. Again, there is no middle-ground.

Exact prescriptions for salvation vary according to denomination but being part of the right religion (and sometimes the right denomination) are typically at least part of the deal if not fully. This "faith-based" scheme of salvation ratchets the stakes to alarming levels.

In fact, if Hell really is a real place where you really do go to be eternally tormented if you have not received Jesus, the stakes could not be higher, not just for you but for all your loved ones.

Given this belief, how could a little torture be a bad thing. If torturing someone in this life leads them to salvation for eternity, isn't that a good thing? If burning an unrepentant heretic at the stake can silence criticism of holy doctrine and therefore save more souls for all eternity, isn't that a good thing?

If your child, if you have one, were about to be thrown into a lake of fire, wouldn't you use lethal force, if needed, to stop your child's assailant? How about an atheist who speaks out against your religion and therefore endangers all who heed him to Hell, including potentially your children and other loved ones?

Again, most Muslims and Christians won't take it that far but it's easy to see why a few would. Bloody crusades, jihads, inquisitions, pogroms, etc are not an aberration from Islamo-Christian doctrine but rather the very flowering of these faiths.

"Moderate" Islamo-Christian sects are simply watered down versions where old doctrines are diluted with modern learning and sensibility. While they are preferable to the fundamentalist strains, they are also offering cover to a more malevolent ideology.

Again to break it down:

Moderate Christian: (holding a Bible) "This is God's Word..."
Fundy Christian: "...right, and this is what it says..."

Clear?

If the belief system poses a danger to life or liberty, I will agree with you.

How can Islamo-Christianity value liberty? How can you give freedom to those who serve the devil? How can you tolerate their liberty to do so? What is the value of their life verses saving more souls for all eternity, souls which the unrepentant heathen might take with him to Hell.

However the Christian faith as reflected in the Bible states just the opposite.

Romans 13:1-2, just to cite one contra-example. There are plenty more but that's a good start.

To the contrary, empirical investigation is strongly encouraged in the Christian faith.
Mar 12:30 And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.

That verse doesn't suggest free thought, critical examination or rational inquiry at all. Grasping at straws much?

Please explain "enslaved" , "terrifying", "dis-empowering" with reference to the Christian faith.

If Hell isn't terrifying I don't know what is.

If questioning dogma or apostasy are a ticket to Hell, how is that not slavery?

If one is encouraged to pray instead of doing it yourself, this is not empowering.

assist with the moral decline in society,

There is no moral decline. Quite to the contrary. Evils once tolerated, like slavery, war crimes, tyrannical leaders, etc. are now reviled. Even in the last generation, with the end of segregation to greater awareness of human rights, we can see that humans are morally progressing.

This moral progress, like our progress in science and reason, was often made by dragging Islamo-Christianity kicking and screaming the whole way.

We are all slaves - either to the flesh [My interjection: In other words, the devil, right?], or to God.

Thank you for underscoring problem #1 above.

Considering the point Our purpose indicates that you have an agenda as well of convincing people that your way is the "one", not so?

As my post already stated, it's not telling others what to think but encouraging others to have the bravery and freedom to think at all.