My religious perspective is closest to that of the Liberal Quakers, that was my church as a boy.
The Quakers reject a literalist interpretation of the Bible. It's important to read the Bible but to attempt to read it "literally" is in itself perilous interpretation of the book. This is illustrated in the New Testament by Jesus' conflict with the highly literalist Pharissees. The risk is that you trample all over the SPIRIT of the Bible in your attempt to obey it literally.
In some ways this is a pre-cursor to Sartre's existentialist philosophy, though God and Christ are still part of the equation. That's a digression.
Anyway Jesus was seriously down with adhering to the spirit of the OT and preached a philosophy of humility, love and compassion, and that combination along with his sacrifice should be enough to end the need for the Old Covenent, and usher in Christ's New Covenent that allowed mankind to break from the orthodox rituals of Judaism. Now anyone could be saved, and rituals and doctrine that the Chosen People had to obey to achieve salvation were optional.
So then it follows that (in the spirit of Christ) singling out a particular demographic for oppression seems all wrong. It may be the literal word of the Bible but it doesn't hold up to a critical analysis with regards to the SPIRIT of what Jesus was saying. It's the opposite of love and compassion. And in perceiving a segment of the population as inherently INFERIOR, it is the opposite of humility!
I don't see Satan as a separate being of willful evil, rather Satan is that part of each of us that rebels against authority. A symbol of rebellion and pride. Satan is us. We are Satan. But if I did see Satan as a separate being of willful evil than he could hardly concoct a better tool of damnation than to infect the Church of Christ with the evil of intolerance. Thinking they are following Jesus, but preaching hatefulness and therefore seduced into rejecting the spirit of what Jesus was saying.
And the incentive for the intolerance is a form of pride, the pride of the Pharissees, that by adhering to the letter of the law (but obviously subverting it's spirit) somehow makes you more worthy of salvation. That's what Jesus was going on about when it comes to the Pharissees.
The Quakers reject a literalist interpretation of the Bible. It's important to read the Bible but to attempt to read it "literally" is in itself perilous interpretation of the book. This is illustrated in the New Testament by Jesus' conflict with the highly literalist Pharissees. The risk is that you trample all over the SPIRIT of the Bible in your attempt to obey it literally.
In some ways this is a pre-cursor to Sartre's existentialist philosophy, though God and Christ are still part of the equation. That's a digression.
Anyway Jesus was seriously down with adhering to the spirit of the OT and preached a philosophy of humility, love and compassion, and that combination along with his sacrifice should be enough to end the need for the Old Covenent, and usher in Christ's New Covenent that allowed mankind to break from the orthodox rituals of Judaism. Now anyone could be saved, and rituals and doctrine that the Chosen People had to obey to achieve salvation were optional.
So then it follows that (in the spirit of Christ) singling out a particular demographic for oppression seems all wrong. It may be the literal word of the Bible but it doesn't hold up to a critical analysis with regards to the SPIRIT of what Jesus was saying. It's the opposite of love and compassion. And in perceiving a segment of the population as inherently INFERIOR, it is the opposite of humility!
I don't see Satan as a separate being of willful evil, rather Satan is that part of each of us that rebels against authority. A symbol of rebellion and pride. Satan is us. We are Satan. But if I did see Satan as a separate being of willful evil than he could hardly concoct a better tool of damnation than to infect the Church of Christ with the evil of intolerance. Thinking they are following Jesus, but preaching hatefulness and therefore seduced into rejecting the spirit of what Jesus was saying.
And the incentive for the intolerance is a form of pride, the pride of the Pharissees, that by adhering to the letter of the law (but obviously subverting it's spirit) somehow makes you more worthy of salvation. That's what Jesus was going on about when it comes to the Pharissees.
Comment