First, I have no horse in this race whatsoever-- I am Jewish so your assertion doesn't apply to me. But I will say, as someone who teaches comparative religion, that what you have just "asked" is false as well as unnecessarily harsh. All religions are based on a combination of truth and exaggeration. Scriptures generally contain a certain degree of historical accuracy: there really was an Israelite leader name Moses (Moshe), and he had a major impact on what became Judaism; there really was a young preacher and teacher named Jesus (Yeshua), and many of his followers found him very charismatic. But much of the New Testament is complicated by the fact that Jesus left no writings, so what was written about him came only from his followers; the verses were undoubtedly affected by the love and respect the early Christians had for him.
However, as any scholar will acknowledge, religious scriptures are not meant to be objective: they are meant to define a specific theology, explain its tenets, and/or tell the history of that religion's growth and development. Often they are also meant to reinforce the truth or superiority of that faith. And it's not just Christianity that uses its scriptures for that purpose. To cite another example, I cannot prove (and I frankly doubt) that the Hindu deity Krishna took a human body and came to live with Yashoda and Nanda Maharaj, who raised him as their child; but my Hindu friends absolutely believe he did, because their scriptures say so. I don't have to agree; I just have to respect what is true for them, as long as they have the space for me and my beliefs.
Of course, as a Jew, I find some of the New Testament to be historically inaccurate; but I understand it is meant to be a document of faith. It tells the story of how Christianity broke away from Judaism (and some Christians believe, how it superseded Judaism); for many of my Christian friends, the historical problems are not what matters-- the story of what they believe about Jesus is the main thing, and the New Testament is thus the place where they find the quotations and the verses that inform what they are supposed to believe. (I feel the same way about the Hebrew Bible and the Commentaries, like the Talmud.)
If there is a Hell (and that in itself is debatable-- nowhere in the Hebrew Bible is a burning hell mentioned, or any other kind of Hell), I doubt that the people who believed their scriptures will automatically end up there. I believe the people who used their scripture to preach hatred, or to feel superior, or to cast judgment... they are the ones who will have to answer. As a Jew, of course I find some Christian practices are difficult to accept. But I am sure that Christians cannot fathom why I don't just accept Jesus immediately. None of this will be resolved on this website (or on any other). Given the sincere, but often entrenched, beliefs most people have, I don't find it useful to cast aspersions on all of Christianity. Debates about theology can be fun at times, but they usually lead to one side or the other being endlessly frustrated by the "spiritual blindness" of the other side. Life's too short to spend time arguing or calling each other names. I'd rather focus on teaching respect, and work with Christians (and other faiths, including my friends who are atheists and agnostics) to fight prejudice and combat stereotypes.
Other opinions:
Actually, everyone deserves to go to hell for breaking any number of commandments, but God offers us a way of redemption: "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." Romans 6:23 NIV
Who can say they have never lied, or stolen anything, or used God's name as a curse word?
Jesus is the only human who has ever lived that never broke any commandment. He took on our punishment. He died for us that we may live (in eternity with God). John 3:16 states: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." NIV
Salvation is a free gift offered to everyone which cannot be earned by doing good works. That is the "Good News" or "Gospel".
Mormonism, and Joseph Smith did not exist when Christianity was established in the first century A.D., so why would the "foundation of lies" start "with Christ through Joseph Smith"? Joseph Smith was born in the 19th century and wrote the Book of Mormon during his lifetime.
None. There is no god!
Depends. For most of the mainstream Churches in Christianity, the answer would be yes - even encouraged to do so. There are smaller sects of Christianity that would not allow this as they would view it as breaking God's Second Command.
The word you are looking for is "sin." Sin refers to breaking a religious or moral law, such as a commandment. It is often associated with wrongdoing or transgression.
not really because you can make your owe choices and god wont mind coz that's your choice
Some of their members are Christian, but they aren't a Christian band.
From the momentt of Christianity's inception, it began breaking away from Judaism. So the phrase "in Judaism" is not the most accurate way to put it.
(Matthew 26: 26-28) In the Last Supper Jesus told his deciples the bread was like his body and the wine was like his blood. His body was broken to pay for our sins, (hence, the "breaking of bread"). As far as whether or not it is unique to Christianity, I'm pretty sure Christians are the only ones who normally perform the ritual.
You would have your hand either marked by a brand or your hand would be removed so that everyone knew you were a thief
Ecumenism is important because it promotes unity and understanding among different Christian denominations, fostering dialogue and collaboration on shared beliefs and values. This movement encourages Christians to work together to address social issues and promote peace, reflecting the message of love and inclusivity central to Christianity. By breaking down barriers and celebrating diversity within the faith, ecumenism helps to strengthen the overall witness of Christianity in the world.
What do you think? If Jesus was standing beside you, what would HE say?
Alan Turing
Anne Hutchinson was accused of breaking the fifth commandment, which emphasizes honoring one's parents, because her religious views and teachings challenged the established authority of the Puritan leaders in Massachusetts. By promoting her interpretations of scripture and leading gatherings that questioned the clergy, she was seen as undermining the patriarchal structure of the community and disrespecting the spiritual "parents" of the colony. Her actions were perceived as a direct challenge to the societal norms and the authority of the religious leaders, which led to her trial and subsequent banishment.