Is organized religion evil?

[timewerx]

The premise rests entirely on the Greek word "διάβολος" or "diabolos". Devil in English....

Strong's definition of "diabolos"

Short Definition: slanderous, the Slanderer, the Devil
Definition: (adj. used often as a noun), slanderous; with the article: the Slanderer (par excellence), the Devil.

1228 diábolos (from 1225 /diabállō, "to slander, accuse, defame") – properly, a slanderer; a false accuser; unjustly criticizing to hurt (malign) and condemn to sever a relationship.

[1228 (diábolos) is the root of the English word, "Devil" (see also Webster's Dictionary).

1228 (diabolos) in secular Greek means "backbiter," i.e. an accuser, calumniator (slanderer). 1228 (diábolos) is literally someone who "casts through," i.e. making charges that bring down (destroy). Satan is used by God in this plan – as a predictable wind-up toy, playing out his evil nature.]

False accuser in short....

Perhaps, there's no other group in the entire world to have caused each other to (falsely) accuse another of evil than organized religion...

Falsely accusing other people of being evil for the "offense" of simply not a member of the religion we belong to... For example, the Muslims, calling non-Muslims "infidels". An infidel is synonymous to being evil.

But Jesus said, "you shall know them by their fruits" (not according to their religion or w/e). Our deeds is what makes us evil or good, not the label!

 

[2PhiloVoid]

The premise rests entirely on the Greek word "διάβολος" or "diabolos". Devil in English....

Strong's definition of "diabolos"

Short Definition: slanderous, the Slanderer, the Devil
Definition: (adj. used often as a noun), slanderous; with the article: the Slanderer (par excellence), the Devil.

1228 diábolos (from 1225 /diabállō, "to slander, accuse, defame") – properly, a slanderer; a false accuser; unjustly criticizing to hurt (malign) and condemn to sever a relationship.

[1228 (diábolos) is the root of the English word, "Devil" (see also Webster's Dictionary).

1228 (diabolos) in secular Greek means "backbiter," i.e. an accuser, calumniator (slanderer). 1228 (diábolos) is literally someone who "casts through," i.e. making charges that bring down (destroy). Satan is used by God in this plan – as a predictable wind-up toy, playing out his evil nature.]

False accuser in short....

Perhaps, there's no other group in the entire world to have caused each other to (falsely) accuse another of evil than organized religion...

Falsely accusing other people of being evil for the "offense" of simply not a member of the religion we belong to... For example, the Muslims, calling non-Muslims "infidels". An infidel is synonymous to being evil.

But Jesus said, "you shall know them by their fruits" (not according to their religion or w/e). Our deeds is what makes us evil or good, not the label!

I'm sure that sometimes organized religion can exude evil, especially if God's people aren't really listening to the voice of God's Spirit. On the other hand, I'm not sure how much good comes from..."disorganized" religion, especially if it only involves individualistic attempts to solve the confusion ...

Peace,
2PhiloVoid

 

[timewerx]

I have Muslim friends who helped me in times of difficulty. By their deeds, they are good people.

 

[Adstar]

I guess it depends on how it is organized... If it is organized in an evil way then yeah.. If not then no...

 

[Adstar]

I have Muslim friends who helped me in times of difficulty. By their deeds, they are good people.

You will find people in all works salvation religions who will help others.. As a form of earning credibility with God.. Mormons, Harri Krishna's, masons, hundus and more.. Charity is part of the required works in a lot of religions..

And as Jesus said.. No one is good but God.. because in Christian terms the word Good means perfect.. without fault..

 

[Phil 1:21]

Walking with Christ is not a solo sport. Nowhere in the Bible does God say to keep to yourself and not come together with other followers.

 

[timewerx]

Charity is part of the required works in a lot of religions..

In our religion, our form of charity is different. Charity is more like a test, a proof of one's love for God. We must do it because we actually mean it and it's our nature not because the Bible told us to do so, otherwise, it's not genuine charity.

Also charity must be done in secret and special emphasis that we must prioritize our brothers and sisters in the faith. It is different from the concept of "random charity". The "Christian charity" exercises discernment and obviously, that means, we can't just help anyone. We must discern them to be worthy of help that they will use the help we give to further God's Kingdom, and that help rendered won't be used for bad things and it won't cause them to become bad.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

The premise rests entirely on the Greek word "διάβολος" or "diabolos". Devil in English....

Strong's definition of "diabolos"

Short Definition: slanderous, the Slanderer, the Devil
Definition: (adj. used often as a noun), slanderous; with the article: the Slanderer (par excellence), the Devil.

1228 diábolos (from 1225 /diabállō, "to slander, accuse, defame") – properly, a slanderer; a false accuser; unjustly criticizing to hurt (malign) and condemn to sever a relationship.

[1228 (diábolos) is the root of the English word, "Devil" (see also Webster's Dictionary).

1228 (diabolos) in secular Greek means "backbiter," i.e. an accuser, calumniator (slanderer). 1228 (diábolos) is literally someone who "casts through," i.e. making charges that bring down (destroy). Satan is used by God in this plan – as a predictable wind-up toy, playing out his evil nature.]

False accuser in short....

Perhaps, there's no other group in the entire world to have caused each other to (falsely) accuse another of evil than organized religion...

Falsely accusing other people of being evil for the "offense" of simply not a member of the religion we belong to... For example, the Muslims, calling non-Muslims "infidels". An infidel is synonymous to being evil.

But Jesus said, "you shall know them by their fruits" (not according to their religion or w/e). Our deeds is what makes us evil or good, not the label!

"Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world." (James 1:27).

James says that there is a "pure religion" as a part of the truth within God's Word. So no. There is one religion that is not bad.

Now, every other organized religion that does not align itself with God's Word is evil. For the Scriptures say that anyone who does not abide in the doctrine of Christ has not God. In fact, we are not to receive anyone who abides not in the doctrine of Christ into our house or bid them "God speed" (i.e. encourage them with the Lord's blessing). For if we send them away with God's blessing, we will be taking part in their evil deeds.

9 "Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds."
(2 John 1:9-11).

 

[Halbhh]

The premise rests entirely on the Greek word "διάβολος" or "diabolos". Devil in English....

Strong's definition of "diabolos"

Short Definition: slanderous, the Slanderer, the Devil
Definition: (adj. used often as a noun), slanderous; with the article: the Slanderer (par excellence), the Devil.

1228 diábolos (from 1225 /diabállō, "to slander, accuse, defame") – properly, a slanderer; a false accuser; unjustly criticizing to hurt (malign) and condemn to sever a relationship.

[1228 (diábolos) is the root of the English word, "Devil" (see also Webster's Dictionary).

1228 (diabolos) in secular Greek means "backbiter," i.e. an accuser, calumniator (slanderer). 1228 (diábolos) is literally someone who "casts through," i.e. making charges that bring down (destroy). Satan is used by God in this plan – as a predictable wind-up toy, playing out his evil nature.]

False accuser in short....

Perhaps, there's no other group in the entire world to have caused each other to (falsely) accuse another of evil than organized religion...

Falsely accusing other people of being evil for the "offense" of simply not a member of the religion we belong to... For example, the Muslims, calling non-Muslims "infidels". An infidel is synonymous to being evil.

But Jesus said, "you shall know them by their fruits" (not according to their religion or w/e). Our deeds is what makes us evil or good, not the label!

The word "religion" now has at least 3 commonly used meanings that are not alike, and the newest common meaning currently in wide usage in the U.S. is sharply unlike the other used definitions (and not yet in dictionaries I think).

The current new usage in widespread use causes some confusion because some people at times don't realize other people are referring to a different thing with the word.

Even in our own church we often use it in this new way, which I'd try to give a definition like this: "organized religion" (new usage meaning, not primary meaning) -- "a false or appearances-only pretension or tradition that is only human in origin".

Of course, if someone is using the word religion in one of the old definitions, this new definition (not yet in dictionaries) is potentially explosive, because they will mistakenly think you are referring to a true, authentic, and cherished thing they have, and not to the thing you actually mean.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

The word "religion" now has at least 3 commonly used meanings that are not alike, and the newest common meaning currently in wide usage in the U.S. is sharply unlike the other used definitions (and not yet in dictionaries I think).

The current new usage in widespread use causes some confusion because some people at times don't realize other people are referring to a different thing with the word.

Even in our own church we often use it in this new way, which I'd try to give a definition like this: "organized religion" (new usage meaning, not primary meaning) -- "a false or appearances-only pretension or tradition that is only human in origin".

Of course, if someone is using the word religion in one of the old definitions, this new definition (not yet in dictionaries) is potentially explosive, because they will mistakenly think you are referring to a true, authentic, and cherished thing they have, and not to the thing you actually mean.

I believe the KJV is the perfect and preserved Word God for our world language today (Which is English). Granted, I believe in using Modern Translations to get to the gold that is in the KJV and the original languages (i.e. Hebrew and Greek). For the KJV uses 1600's English that is hard to understand sometimes. Anyways, I believe the KJV is my final word of authority because there is not many Words of God, but there is only one and because Modern Translations fall short in the fruits test department. Also, not all Bibles say exactly the same thing. They are close, but not precise. One has to choose which Bible is the actual Word of God. For they cannot all be the Word of God. God is not the author of confusion.

This is why I refer to the word "religion" as being a good thing because it comes from the KJV in the book of James. However, there is an agenda out there. People are trying to change what God's Word says. So words like "religion" that were once good, now are bad according to our post modern culture.

 

[Halbhh]

I believe the KJV is the perfect and preserved Word God for our world language today (Which is English). Granted, I believe in using Modern Translations to get to the gold that is in the KJV and the original languages (i.e. Hebrew and Greek). For the KJV uses 1600's English that is hard to understand sometimes. Anyways, I believe the KJV is my final word of authority because there is not many Words of God, but there is only one and because Modern Translations fall short in the fruits test department. Also, not all Bibles say exactly the same thing. They are close, but not precise. One has to choose which Bible is the actual Word of God. For they cannot all be the Word of God. God is not the author of confusion.

This is why I refer to the word "religion" as being a good thing because it comes from the KJV in the book of James. However, there is an agenda out there. People are trying to change what God's Word says. So words like "religion" that were once good, now are bad according to our post modern culture.

I grew up reading the KJV, and because I was a reader, and wanted to, I read through it fully, at least once around age 11. I additionally read through a 2nd time fully before age 14, though I'm not quite sure if that was also the KJV or a very similar translation. But I do vividly remember much KJV wording. Like this wonderfully mind expanding wording, for instance (only one of many) -- "...Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof." That just has extra compared to another good translation like "Sufficient for the day is its own trouble."

So, I do love the KJV for that and like wordings. I wonder how you like the ESV? Perhaps you haven't seen it much though. I tend to read the bible online much now because of the easy to use and very good site Biblehub. Here's that verse --

Matthew 6:34 Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.
(link is not to only this NIV version alone)

I notice the link brings in an NIV quotation, but the link is not to the NIV in particular, but to all major translations.

 

[Halbhh]

I believe the KJV is the perfect and preserved Word God for our world language today (Which is English). Granted, I believe in using Modern Translations to get to the gold that is in the KJV and the original languages (i.e. Hebrew and Greek). For the KJV uses 1600's English that is hard to understand sometimes. Anyways, I believe the KJV is my final word of authority because there is not many Words of God, but there is only one and because Modern Translations fall short in the fruits test department. Also, not all Bibles say exactly the same thing. They are close, but not precise. One has to choose which Bible is the actual Word of God. For they cannot all be the Word of God. God is not the author of confusion.

This is why I refer to the word "religion" as being a good thing because it comes from the KJV in the book of James. However, there is an agenda out there. People are trying to change what God's Word says. So words like "religion" that were once good, now are bad according to our post modern culture.

Also, I notice most translations are using "religion" in that verse:

James 1:27 Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.

But more, they word the modifiers in such way:

"Pure and undefiled religion..."

Even back then, already, the word "religion" is being given with modifiers to carefully frame it to it's intended useage!

Isn't that interesting.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Also, I notice most translations are using "religion" in that verse:

James 1:27 Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.

But more, they word the modifiers in such way:

"Pure and undefiled religion..."

Even back then, already, the word "religion" is being given with modifiers to carefully frame it to it's intended useage!

Isn't that interesting.

There are a few Modern Translations that do not use the word "religion." The CEB, ERV, TLB, NIRV, NMB, NTE, OJB, and the WE.

Also, certain Christians refer to the word "religion" as being bad:

God Hates Religion

God Hates Religion

http://frankpowell.me/jesus-hates-religion

 

[timewerx]

I believe the KJV is the perfect and preserved Word God for our world language today (Which is English). Granted, I believe in using Modern Translations to get to the gold that is in the KJV and the original languages (i.e. Hebrew and Greek). For the KJV uses 1600's English that is hard to understand sometimes. Anyways, I believe the KJV is my final word of authority because there is not many Words of God, but there is only one and because Modern Translations fall short in the fruits test department. Also, not all Bibles say exactly the same thing. They are close, but not precise. One has to choose which Bible is the actual Word of God. For they cannot all be the Word of God. God is not the author of confusion.

This is why I refer to the word "religion" as being a good thing because it comes from the KJV in the book of James. However, there is an agenda out there. People are trying to change what God's Word says. So words like "religion" that were once good, now are bad according to our post modern culture.

Indeed, the word "religion" is a good thing.

Which is why I used "organized religion" which changes its context entirely. Which in this context means religion that is corrupted by flawed men.

 

[timewerx]

Now, every other organized religion that does not align itself with God's Word is evil.
.

That is the concern of my thread.

That is true. However, my thread also discuss that we can't assume a person under a religion perceived to be evil is likewise evil.

For example we heard about Muslim teachings about the persecution of non-believers which is probably the cause of terrorism and then the Muslims who see Christians as evil.

But my Muslim friends are different. They are good, they treated me a like a brother.

To be honest, I still see their religion as evil but these men who chose to be my friend, they are good people.

So I think it really isn't religion that makes into something. It's simply what we choose to do.

 

[Sketcher]

Jesus had no problems with organized religion in and of itself. He had problems with abuses within its ranks.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

That is the concern of my thread.

That is true. However, my thread also discuss that we can't assume a person under a religion perceived to be evil is likewise evil.

According to Jesus, they are.
Even if their moral code is to be loving and good towards others.
First, they are rejecting Jesus Christ. Jesus said a person will die in their sins if they do not believe in Him. Second, they no doubt have serious sins that would condemn them according to the New Testament.

For example we heard about Muslim teachings about the persecution of non-believers which is probably the cause of terrorism and then the Muslims who see Christians as evil.

Yeah, there are no radical Christians blowing up Muslim buildings and planting bombs everywhere in their country (like they do with us). Yes, there are self professing Christians who do evil things here in America, but they are not done towards them. They are also not a major threat to a nation as a whole, either. Hate groups like the Westboro Baptist church do not threaten the nation like radical Muslims do.

But my Muslim friends are different. They are good, they treated me a like a brother.

First, it is not wrong to be friendly with people and to love all people. We are commanded to love even our enemies. But we should not have fellowship or make friends with non-believers. For it is written, what fellowship does light have with darkness? Yes, people of all religions can treat each other good, but that does not mean they do not have sin in their life that separates them from GOD. That does not mean they are not spitting in the face of your Savior.

To be honest, I still see their religion as evil but these men who chose to be my friend, they are good people.

What appears to be good on the surface of the ocean is an illusion. Deep beneath the ocean there lies hidden predators like sharks, etc. Trust me, they have sins in their life that you would not approve of. You do not have a machine or a micro chip that records their every sin. But even if they did live a perfectly moral life, which is not possible without Jesus Christ, they are rejecting Jesus Christ (Who is our Savior). That right there is what is serious immoral and wrong because they are rejecting His great love sacrifice. They are spitting upon that love (i.e. rejecting it).

So I think it really isn't religion that makes into something. It's simply what we choose to do.

No. Not true. It is JESUS who changes lives, my friend. It is not you or the individual.

For there is nothing that can tranform or changes lives more than Jesus Christ; That is why God's people preach the good news of Jesus Christ so as to be saved by Him. For Jesus has fixed up broken homes (or familes). Jesus has drawn the alcoholic away from the bottle. Jesus has helped the gambler to put down his cards and walk away from the game. Jesus has helped the drug addict from the power of the needle. Jesus has helped the harlot from being a slave to sexual sin and money. For Jesus Christ changes lives. Jesus changed my life and He continues to change lives today (Making them new creations in His image).

"Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new." (2 Corinthians 5:17).

The Muslim does not have this hope.
Only in Jesus can a person truly be set free like this.

Also, please read this article below about an ex Muslim (turned Christian). He says the Koran is violent at it's core.

Prominent Ex-Muslim Was Asked if Islam Is a Peaceful Religion. Here’s His Response.

 

[zephcom]

Anyways, I believe the KJV is my final word of authority because there is not many Words of God, but there is only one and because Modern Translations fall short in the fruits test department. Also, not all Bibles say exactly the same thing. They are close, but not precise. One has to choose which Bible is the actual Word of God. For they cannot all be the Word of God. God is not the author of confusion.

If one has a very special grape they need to hide from others, a vineyard is the very best place to hide it. Just leave it in plain sight along beside a hundred thousand grapes just like it.

The Bible falls into that category. If we assume there is one Bible version which perfectly represents 'God's Word' the best place to hide it is on a shelf right next to hundreds of other versions. No one will ever know which one is the perfect one.

The problem with deciding this version or that version is the 'valid' version of the Bible is that there are no original documents in existence. And, I would contend, that the ONLY Bible which is authentic is the one which has nothing in it except the very parchments the authors wrote on.

Every other document is flawed because it is a copy. And, until the printing press was invented, every copied was made by human hands. The errors in the existing ancient copies are legion simply because humans can't copy correctly 100 percent of the time.

And, FWIW, the original KJV of the Bible is recognized by scholars as one of the worst English translations in existence. But since we no longer have the ability to identify the most accurate, any should work equally well as long as we don't expect each and every word to reveal deep spiritual meaning. The general stories are the same in all the versions.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

If one has a very special grape they need to hide from others, a vineyard is the very best place to hide it. Just leave it in plain sight along beside a hundred thousand grapes just like it.

The Bible falls into that category. If we assume there is one Bible version which perfectly represents 'God's Word' the best place to hide it is on a shelf right next to hundreds of other versions. No one will ever know which one is the perfect one.

The problem with deciding this version or that version is the 'valid' version of the Bible is that there are no original documents in existence. And, I would contend, that the ONLY Bible which is authentic is the one which has nothing in it except the very parchments the authors wrote on.

Every other document is flawed because it is a copy. And, until the printing press was invented, every copied was made by human hands. The errors in the existing ancient copies are legion simply because humans can't copy correctly 100 percent of the time.

And, FWIW, the original KJV of the Bible is recognized by scholars as one of the worst English translations in existence. But since we no longer have the ability to identify the most accurate, any should work equally well as long as we don't expect each and every word to reveal deep spiritual meaning. The general stories are the same in all the versions.

I am only addressing Christian responses in this thread.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Double post.