Lets recap:

1) You bring up this thread, though you don't mention Islam, even though it is clearly what you really wish people to focus on.

- This raises the question of honesty - why wouldn't you be upfront, unless you were already aware people find your ongoing crusade objectionable? Unless of course, you don't wish to accept their criticism, and continue heedless of what people say, which in turns indicates a certain unwillingness to consider other views.

2) When Islam is brought up, you say the issue really is about exclusivity, probably due to the transparency of being ok with government multi-faith centres that resemble christian faiths more, but not liking Islamic ones.

-Problem here is, that such exclusivity doesn't exist. It's merely a protest, which you then fall back on. Which brings me back to the point I made about demands above. Clearly, such an argument is rather weak, but hey.

Oh, and if you want, you can ignore this post, but for the love of god, don't give me one of your insufferable comments as though you're an arbiter of religious wisdom and it's everybody else who is uninformed.

Polycarp,
“Fractelle for whom I hold hope”
I almost envy Fractelle.

“They are protesting wanting EXCLUSIVITY.”
You are concerned about exclusivity, but would it be possible that Muslim students have a valid reason for requiring a prayer room that resembles the Islam faith more than the Christian faith?
AS TRTL mentioned, government multi-faith centres resemble christian faiths more.

You say that you understand Islam, then you’re also aware that Islamic faith requires specific things like a dedicated prayer room, certain hygiene and dress codes, absence of idolatry etc.
If Islamic faith really requires such room for Muslims to be able to practice their faith properly, shouldn’t they be granted that room in the name of Freedom of Religion?
After all, there are 2 other multi-faith rooms at the campus already.

If RMIT didn’t think that Muslims had a valid reason for a separate prayer room then why did they pledge it in the first place?
And why did they later break that promise?

"After all, there are 2 other multi-faith rooms at the campus already."

Public money being squandered erecting quasi religious facilities on public land so that insular little groups like Polycrap's can fight each other over their share of access. What a sick joke. I could even laugh, if I wasn't one of the poor sucker taxpayers. And if I wasn't watching public education being run down due to lack of funding.

Dear Polycarp,

Please read the following carefully.

I appreciate being called lovable. It is not bitter to recognise the Christian responsibility for the Holocaust. My eyes are open, but you choose to keep your eyes shut.

The Holocaust was the product of years of Christian bigotry. It was in the truest sense applied Christianity. Some Christians recognize their fruits.

The following is from a Lutheran group recognizing Christian responsibility for the Holocaust:

http://www.kanaan.org/international/israel/israel7.htm

. . . a repentance initiative
hosted by the Evangelical Sisterhood of Mary, Darmstadt, Germany; a community founded in 1947 by Mother Basilea Schlink

Statement of Purpose:
‘Have mercy upon me, O God,
according to thy lovingkindness:
according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies
blot out my transgressions.'
Psalm 51:1 AV

As Jews and Christians we worship the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. We affirm our faith in Him as the one true God. To love Him with all our heart, with all our soul and with all our strength is our holy duty (Deuteronomy 6:4-5).

Instead of being united in love for God, we as Christians have sinned grievously against God's covenant people. Two thousand years of Church history have left a trail of blood: contempt, hatred, hostility, persecution and wholesale slaughter.

Time and again the Jewish people have suffered at the hands of Christians. They have been humiliated, deprived of their rights, accused of murdering God and blamed for every imaginable calamity. During the Crusades, the Inquisition, the pogroms and, most horrific of all, the Holocaust, millions of Jews have suffered flagrant injustice.

At the beginning of the third millennium we can only confess this terrible guilt in deep shame before God and the Jewish people, deploring the involvement of many Christians. We seek His forgiveness for all the anguish that Israel, His chosen people, have suffered. By the grace of God we resolve to turn from these ways.

We commit ourselves to pray for His people, to oppose antisemitism in all its forms, and to ensure that respect and goodwill will mark our relations as Christians with the Jewish people in future.

Dear Polycarp,

Call Spong a heretic, and you can ignore his good sense.

Who are you to label a bishop of the Anglican Church in good standing a heretic?

Unfortunately various Christian churches have labeled those who make good sense as heretics. The neurotic guilt-ridden St. Augustine pushed his perverted doctrine of Original Sin. Pelagius with remarkably good sense claimed death is a normal consequence of life and not a punishment for sin and also claimed that we are born free of sin. So what happened? The Council of Carthage declared Pelagius a heretic and exiled him.

Jesus statement John 14:6 "No man comes to the Father but by me" is intolerant whether it is through belief in the heart or not. To say a person is denied God because they don’t believe in a particular bit of Christian mumbo jumbo is sick. I don’t need Spong to tell me that. I thought that about that particular statement when I had never heard of Spong. However, I am glad that a Christian can recognize that parts of the New Testament are responsible for Christian bigotry. To call Spong a heretic is just a label applied to someone whose inconvenient truths you prefer to ignore.

Is the Evangelical Sisterhood of Mary also made up of heretics? They connected the Holocaust with Christianity.

I wish Spong success in his effort to rid Christianity of its inherent bigotry.

David F, at the age of 15 I suffered a crisis of faith which had serious consequences for me for the next decade or so. Since then I have recieved instruction from Rabbis, Imans, Priests, Pastors, Swamis, and many good and wonderful people of faiths as diverse as Rastafarianism and Wicca. I have made comparative religions and their history a subject of lifelong study both informally and at University. During this long journey both before and after finally reaching the conclusions to which I now adhere (albeit remaining receptive to the idea that my Truth may not be The Truth)I have also extensively studied The Bible and Koran. Judging by responses on these forums over the years, I am not alone.

The views, sentiments and opinions continually expressed by the poster currently known as Polycarp fly in the face of every honourable and sincere spiritual leader I have ever met or studied. One of the reasons he arouses such animosity is that these views, sentiments and opinions are the antithesis of spirituality as most people understand the concept and consequently are offensive to people of good faith no matter what their creed. To represent these personal views as being representative of Christianity per se is to mis-represent the Christianity to which the majority of Christians on this forum and in the wider community adhere.

The mutual lack of respect which typifies exchanges with Polycarp is not gratuitous on the part of other posters, but is a reflection of the resistance of both believers and non-believers towards affiliation with a personal creed which purports to hold therein the only possible path for humankind to follow. All seeming attempts by Polycarp to "engage" have proved spurious as have claims to a wider knowledge than those with whom he engages.

Objectivity is regarded by Polycarp as culpability therefore is resisted strongly. Simply be aware that the views expressed by him (especially in regard to such questions as Christian depredations) do not reflect the views of the majority.