Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: leonid on July 29, 2001, 10:37:00 PM
-
How do you reconcile the Old Testament's "Eye for an eye, Tooth for a tooth" with the New Testament's "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you?" The Old Testament is pretty cut and dry. You do something wrong, you pay for it in equal terms. In the New Testament the message is more of leniency, consideration, and compassion.
This isn't a troll, I'm just really curious. When I used to be a Roman Catholic the logic was that the Old Testament was, well, old. Thus, the New Testament took precedence if ever there was discrepency.
-
The book of Hebrews (look below) contains much of what you are asking about. The old testament (or covenant) was put into effect on Mt. Sinai with communication between God and Moses at about 1400 BC I think. The New Testament went into effect after the crucifixion of Christ about 33 AD, therefore overiding the old law (or testament).
Hbr 8:7 For if that first [covenant] had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
Hbr 8:13 In that he saith, A new [covenant], he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old [is] ready to vanish away.
There's a lot more to the story, but thats the basics. There's more verses in the bible dealing with it, but that's all that I can think of with (my tired) mind right now.
:)
BTW the book of Hebrews is actually a letter written (belived by some to be written by the Apostle Paul) to encourage new jewish converts at the time (believed to be shortly before AD64).
Hope this helps, I'm not a Bible scholar by no means.
-
I am an atheist, but the question Leonid asked wondered me too.
In the room net to our server compartment in Biochemical Physics institute there lives (yes, he actually lives at work) one scientist, who also teaches Bible in the Orthodox Sunday school.
I often talked with him, he's a very nice person. When I asked that question to him, he said that "Eye for an eye, Tooth for a tooth" was simply a "punishment codex" of the ancient Jews. A practical advice how to punish criminals.
-
I think Hblair about summed it up. That's the main-only reason I'm against the death penalty. Sad part is that I never hear Christians talking about this, or when I bring it up in a death penalty debate, they say I'm crazy.
I'd be willing to bet that 90% of the Christians out there think they have it right when in actuality they've got it wrong, that I blame on the church. It's kind of hard to get somebody to believe you love him when your poking out his eyes and pulling out his teath....
Udie
-
I would say this is a matter of interpretation; you read what you want to read. You interpret to confirm your beliefs.
Those who cite the "eye for an eye" passage often to so to justify revenge and/or capital punishment.
Thus it's sad to realize that technical and scientific development has gone from the abacus to super computers in the time moral, social and ethical level of the society has been standing still or even treaded backwards....
-
as i understand it - many actions of the new testament were meant to update jewish law. christianity is just a kind of reformation of judaism and the supposed fulfillment of jewish prophecy, i never understood why we treat it like its own religion.
it was supposed to update all kinds of stuff- not just the eye for an eye thing but dietery/purity laws, sabbath laws and a bunch of other stuff. unfortunately even in the new tesatment the message isn't entirely clear. compare the gospels sometime- amongst the other inconsistencies you find - one is a vengeful jesus who says
"Think not that I come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword."
Matt 10:28
as opposed to the nice jesus who says turn the other cheek. some say one gospel was meant to appeal to convert minded jews who wanted to see the romans punished for desecrating the temple around 60ad (??)and others were written to appeal to greeks or romans. most of the new testament is now believed to have been written by the early jesus movement rather than actual guys who hung out with him - over a period of about 100 years..blah blah blah....its a long complicated answer and beyond the scope of this forum. :)
-
-
leonid, the entire quote is, "An eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, vengence is mine, sayith the Lord." meaning, what you do in life, you will have to answer for when you stand before him, which is pretty much what the new testement says.
-
mrfish, i think you mean 10:34, not 28. In reading the entire chapter, I don't get the impression of vengence, but one of conflict between light and darkness, if you will. If vengence was really the aim there, i think it would have said "but the sword".
But then again, IANABS (i am not a Bible scholar) by any means either.
darkstar
-
The New Testament is a PC version of the Old.
We, mankind, will come up with a revised version when we think the New Testament rules are too tough on us.
Ever wonder just how many humans have died for their God?
I wonder whos Diety is the real BOSS?
-
Ok. I will try to answer this question as best as I can.
The Old Testament was Jewish law. Inside, are many prophesies referring to what we call the Messiah. I can't speak for Jews, because I haven't studied up on thier take on this, but christians believe that Jesus was the Messiah that the prophesies referred to. Read the book of Isaiah, which was written a thousand years or so before Christ (a copy was found with the Dead Sea Scrolls) and then read about Jesus in the New Testament. First off, we have to argue that Jesus WAS the Messiah. We also need to understand Man's relationship with God in the Old Testament was all about "eye for an eye...". Someone had to pay for that sin, whatever it was or whoever it was against.
Now in the New Testament, God erases the "eye for an eye..." by sending his own, blameless son to pay the price for those sins against Him (God the father). One has to accept the gift that Jesus paid the price for their sins. There is a big arguement that "If I'm good enough, that's enough, right?" when in truth, no one is good enough on their own. We have all sinned, and fallen short of the glory of God. The relationship that God has with Man through his son, Jesus, is one of love and forgiveness, whereas in the Old Testament, it was "eye for an eye...". I hope this answers your question. The bottom line, is that the testaments are different because of the nature of the relationship of man and God. The old "eye for an eye" doesn't apply anymore because of grace, being the gift of Jesus.
-
Originally posted by the_hegemon:
In reading the entire chapter, I don't get the impression of vengence, but one of conflict between light and darkness, if you will.
you mean the darkness(evil) that god created when he created everything? why did he send his son to battle his own creation?
-
Thnx, hblair. I was actually in the seminary when I was a high schooler. Yeah, thought I was gonna be a priest ;) I guess my question had more to do about which one took precedence from a religious point of view, but you have answered that as well :)
Natedog,
Thanks for elaborating. Unfortunately, I think the full phrase only widens the ambiguity. Does this mean vengeance is the exclusive right of the Lord, or is it deemed permissible on Earth by his subjects when it can be determined such is His wish? And, yes, the New Testament does warn those who choose not to follow his way, but in the New Testament 'His way' is radically different from the Old Testament. Jesus almost never condones violence of any kind, though he does allude to understanding the uncontrolability of rage due to an extreme situation (the market in the Temple passage).
-
<------- got kicked out of Sunday school for asking too many "complex" questions ;-) (7 or 8 years old at the time).
One of my all time favourites (JW = Jehovahs Witnesses):
JW: "So V who do you think created the earth and the creates and the universe"
V: "Personally I tend towards the Big Bang camp and evolution did the rest"
JW: "But even if we take that view someone must have created the Big Bang"
V: "Not necessarily, theres the theory of the expanding bubble universe that eventually collapses and creates another big bang"
JW: "But even considering that, someone had to create the universe"
V: "No, its a hard concept for man to grasp, but its always been there"
JW: "But thats impossible, someone had to create it - it just can't have existed forever"
V: "Who do you think created it then"
JW: "God of course"
V: "So who created God then?"
JW: "Nobody, God has existed forever"
V: "ahhh"
(conversations ends politely as they realised where we came too)
-
Vulcan, you'd be surprised of how often i've used the 'exact same argument* - using the JW's own premise to prove their conclusion false.
It's just so BEAUTIFUL.
:)
JW's don't seem all that bad though.
-
Jesus said he did not come to change a single word of God's message; in fact, He came to fulfill it. It can therefore be inferred that what is stated in the Old Testament stands, except where specifically cited (animal sacrifice, as an example).
"Do not think I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." Matthew 5:17-18
To understand the relationship of man to God, think back to the beginning. Man is in the Garden of Eden- paradise. Man, because he has free will, disobeys God's rule (Law) and is forced to leave.
In time the population of the earth is such that rules for conduct are necessary (as evidenced by the wickedness of man and the destruction of man through flood). Along comes Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and through them the world begins to be re-introduced to God.
In the proper time Moses is chosen to lead an oppressed nation out of slavery to live by God's will. At this point God has set His people apart from the rest of the world and gives them the Law. The Law is pretty common sense material for the most part, but it does add the novel idea that God is a jealous god and that He demands no other god be worshipped. And so the Jewish people moved on.
In time Jesus comes. He shows that the teachers of the Law have ultimately failed, because they have put the literal translation of the Law before the spirit of the Law. Worse, the teachers had added their own interpretations that obviously were not in line with God's wishes. Jesus would expose this point time and again.
So, to this point man had failed to live in paradise by following his own way. He failed to live in the world by trying to follow the law. It seemed there was no way to get to heaven because no matter what man did he would always fall short of perfection- and God would not allow imperfection near Him.
Then Jesus came. He became the ultimate blood sacrifice for all sins, and as a result became the sole arbiter through which you can be sanctified and allowed to pass into heaven. The Old and New Testament are both relevant, every word, because they trace the steps through which God shows us we need Him. We cannot make it on our own, as the Bible shows.
Now, how does all this relate to the topic? Simple. "Eye for an Eye" as Boroda put it was a simple and direct way to deal with problems in their society. Don't dream for a second it didn't mean exactly what it sounds like it means. As discussed above, Jesus didn't change the word of God. There are still punishments for evil.
David was a man after God's heart. When King Saul was killed, there came a messenger to David bearing Saul's crown and arm band:
David asked him, "Why were you not afraid to lift your hand to destroy the Lord's annointed?
Then David called one of his men and said, "Go, strike him down!" So he struck him down, and he died. For David had said to him, "Your blood be on your own head. Your own mouth testified against you when you said, 'I killed the Lord's annointed.'" 2 Samuel 1:14-16
Remember, Jesus is also God and the Holy Spirit. God is perfection, therefore God does not contradict himself. What fails is our understanding of Him and his Law. Yes, Jesus wants us to love one another. Yes, he wants us to forgive others. Do not let this make you think that wrong goes unpunished, or that it should. Accountability is in the New Testament too, but it is spoken of more in the Hereafter context.
And take that into consideration. Some people who believe in Heaven and Hell somehow believe that earthly punishment can anywhere near compare to the eternal damnation of Hell. If God can damn you to Hell, He can certainly allow you an earthly execution. Further, there is nothing to say that the people here on earth can't be used as God's hand to carry out His wrath- again, this is clearly true, and pointedly illustrated many times throughout the Bible.
I think we have things out of context. I fear eternal damnation far more than any earthly torture or execution. This doesn't mean we have to be bloodthirsty or anything, but we do have to have accountability for our acts. We have to have rules that make our society function smoothly.
"Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?"
But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, "You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? Show me a coin used for paying the tax." They brought him a denarius, and he asked them, "Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?"
"Caesar's," they replied.
They he said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." Matthew 22:17-21
-
Boy I'm glad I'm an athiest.
-
Atheist, you mean? :)
Am picky about that particular word :).
Hbr 8:7 For if that first [covenant] had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
So it was flawed. God's word was flawed. Or rather, as some have suggested, human scholars started adding stuff to the text. Interesting; the Old testament can then not be said to be the word of God, and even the slightest doubt whether a passage is from a human or from divine inspiration renders the whole thing from a theological point of view tainted.
Hbr 8:13 In that he saith, A new [covenant], he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old [is] ready to vanish away.
I wonder if there isn't someone else who's picked up on the potential of this one.
First of all, it indicates that sin and morals aren't timeless - rather, they're intertwined with time. What is the proper way one day may not be the next. A form of divine relativism is introduced. Quite interesting.
Since none of us can know the workings of God, it is impossible for us to say that a new change will not take place - rendering the current system obsolete. For those caught in the changeover, unless God adds a caveat covering these people, well, these people are then potential big time sinners and they cannot be sure that redemption is still valid so might remain so.
Of course, if the original words of God became tainted after a bit, this suggests there is a possibility that the current set of rules is as well - secular philosophers have argued that this is a possibility for quite a while.
It raises some interesting question. for the atheist, it is of academic interest. For the believer it is of more profound importance. But the believer also has the option of faith, which also makes the questions rather academic.
-
I think I'd be a buddhist if anything :)
-
One thing all you guys are forgetting......
Just as Jesus was the "Talmudic upgrade" of year 0, or there abouts,
So was Mohammet the Christian "upgrade" of about year 430.
Why are so many of you guys stil running obsolete philosophies?
You sure they're Y3K compliant?
And you Buddhists can just shut the hell up, I'm tired of your wierd syntax and koan line interface; you're just snobs not prepared to accept the fact that most believers need a GUI. (Godly Universal Inteligence)
-
HOLD ON!
Some fundamentals are escaping most of you.
First off, the whole point is the relationship between God and Man.
Old Testament=legalism, rules, so on. You had to milk your cow only on the third Tuesday, but not eat eggs on Saturday, or whatever. Read Leviticus. I am exaggerating, but the point is that there were laws about everything, and that was exactly how the relationship between God and Humanity was. If someone committed a sin against his neighbor, he had to pay for that some how. If someone sinned against God, he had to have an atonement (meaning, becoming one with God). There usually was a sacrifice of some sort to pay for a sin.
Then God sent his son, Jesus, and now comes the New Testament, or a new relationship between God and Humanity.
New Testament=Grace.
The main point is, THROW THE LEGALISM, FOLLWING THE LAWS OUT THE WINDOW!!!!!!!!!!
Forget all the rules that were so heavily focused on in the Old Testament. Jesus is there to reconcile the sins against God. You don't have to worry about not eating Pork, or working on the Sabbath, or whatever because it is a moot point anymore.
The new relationship that God has set up, which was planned all along, requires just one thing.
That one admits that they are not perfect, and that they will rely on Jesus as that atonement, or savior. What happens is that when one makes this commitment in their life, they will receive the guidance of the third being in the Trinity, the Holy Spirit. The best way to explain this, is your concience "changes".
The whole point to this, according to Paul, the apostle who wrote many of the New Testament books, is that we can live a life free of the burdens of following all those laws, and can follow Jesus with our own Free Will.
It's not about the rules anymore. God wants man to follow him with their heart, not just because the Jewish Law, or the Old Testament (The law book of the day) tells us to. Sure, there are things that a christian SHOULD do, but the MAIN POINT, is not rules anymore. It's accepting the gift of Jesus's death and ressurection, that THAT was the sacrifice that paid for ALL sins, and making the committment to follow him.
That is the foundation of Christianity.
Of course, as we all know, in every community, there are people who just don't get it (F4u-1c dweebs, and in the Christian community, the TBN channel) and can be very vocal about their beliefs. The trouble is, if your not careful, you might end up believing something without investigating it for yourself. I have seen more "christians" that have it dead wrong than I can fathom, and even worse, thousands more christians who know the truth keeping their mouth shut.
-Greese
:cool:
[ 07-31-2001: Message edited by: Greese ]
-
Paraphrase from George Carlin, NOTE George has made no reference to God only religion
Religious roadkill.
These people want you to believe that there is a invisible man that lives in the sky.
He has ten rules that he commands you to follow.
If you mess up you go to hell and burn in damnation for all eternity.
BUT ... He loves you!
And he needs money!
roadkill :D
Its funnier to hear George tell it.
-
Originally posted by Seeker:
One thing all you guys are forgetting......
Just as Jesus was the "Talmudic upgrade" of year 0, or there abouts,
So was Mohammet the Christian "upgrade" of about year 430.
Why are so many of you guys stil running obsolete philosophies?
You sure they're Y3K compliant?
And you Buddhists can just shut the hell up, I'm tired of your wierd syntax and koan line interface; you're just snobs not prepared to accept the fact that most believers need a GUI. (Godly Universal Inteligence)
Oh I get it, Microsoft invented God! And being as you dummies can't learn a real OS, oops I mean religion, all at one time, we will sell it to you a piece at a time till your up to speed. :D
-
Let me break it down simpler.
God creates man, places him in paradise along with free will. Man ultimately chooses his own path (which is against God). This is sin, so God forces man to leave paradise. Purpose: to show that man is rebellious and sinful by nature.
God creates the Law, providing a way for man to reconcile sin. Man ultimately fouls this up too, adding his own interpretations to the Law and using the Law to abuse his fellow man. Man had missed the meaning and purpose of the Law:
Now a man came to Jesus and said, "Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?"
"Why do you ask me about what is good?" Jesus replied. "There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the Commandments."
"Which ones?" the man inquired.
Jesus replied, "Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor thy father and mother, and 'love your neighbor as thyself."
"All these I have kept," the young man said. "What still do I lack?"
Jesus answered, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come follow me."
When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.
Then Jesus said to his disciples, "I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.
When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and said, "Who then can be saved?"
Jesus looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible." Matthew 20:16-26
The rich man sought to make himself perfect through strict obedience to the law. Jesus revealed the man's weakness- he worshipped his money more than God. The disciples understood the significance of the event. They realized that no one would be able to achieve perfection on their own. "With God, all things are possible" alludes to the fact that it is only God's grace that allows absolution of sin and entrance to heaven.
This was Jesus' mission on earth. Jesus was born to provide a way to wash away sin and to enter heaven.
Man is flawed--> removed from paradise.
Man is shown what needs to happen to achieve perfection through practice of Law--> realizes that no person could possibly follow all the laws without fail.
Jesus arrives and is sacrificed for all sins past, present, and future--> the way to heaven (through God's grace) is opened.
The Old Testament is not outdated, it is part of the plan. The word wasn't/isn't changed. The truth that was there is there. There is no contradiction.
-
for those that believe, no explanation is needed
for those that don't no explanation will suffice..
nitpickers, hair splitters, whatever it takes to justify a self satisfying life style you've chosen this time round.
what goes around comes around, don't have to believe or not believe in anything as you can't escape this eventuality of life
-
i can't believe in a cruel god that's all.
silly:
he creates man which is flawed. god created everything so he created evil too then. if he didnt then there is something higher or at least outside of god and his word is fake. so given your flaws you have a few short decades to avoid a myriad of temptations all created by god and then you are send to hell for infinity if you dont do it right?
talk about setting you up to fail-is this for god's amusement? and if you are going to create a universe and can do it any way you want - why create one where life has to feed on life to survive.....it only sets the stage for suffering. i have seen lions start eating a wildebeast while it is still alive and in agony - is this god's way? every year of earth's history many humans and animals freeze and starve to death. its natural alright but why design it so it has to be that way?
this is where every christian argument breaks down to the cosmic copout - "he works in mysteeeeeeeerious ways" yeah, whatever, in other words it makes no sense to you either. and all this time the invisible spaceguy sits secretly watching and judges us....
i mean, even if you were a buddhist monk that never sinned and spent his life raising orphans and avoiding killing even a bug suddenly died at the age of 25 - for those 2 decades on earth doing good deeds you now spend:
2 decades of good deeds
equals:
10000000000000000000000000000 0
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000^1000000000000000000000000
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000000000000000000000000000 00
00000000000000000000000000000 00
0000000000........ decades receiving unspeakable horrors??? all because you didnt profess that jesus is the undisputed savior? that doesnt sound like a hissy fit to you?
i think cristians tried to figure out what life was all about one day and like everyone else and when it got tough they went runnin for the skirts of mysticism. all cultures do because uncertainty is so frightening.
not everyone who is not a christian leads a self serving lifestyle as you pious types would love to believe. some of us are capable of having a moral system on it's merits alone and without the threat of eternal damnation. imagine that - just doing something because it's right and not out of fear!
if you need threats to stay in line then perhaps its best for you. if the void is that frightening to you then keep fantasising - the rest of us will worry about creating a good place on earth in the here and now.
[ 07-31-2001: Message edited by: mrfish ]
-
no mrfish
that's where the "organized" side of religion blinds ppl. the monk in your story will be rewarded for a proper life as his karma dictates. ppl all around the world live good unselfish, giving lifes and have never even heard of Jesus, Mohammand, Buddha, put your fav messiah here.. and are rewarded with "good vibes" similarly murders and other doers of "evil" receive "bad vibes" for their future journey(s). The rest of us are in between, judged, for a lack of a better term, for our choices and receive what we sow. ppl need to think in universal terms, underlying themes and not get wrapped up in specifics. used properly organized religion will lead to enlightenment, used for selfish/materialistic gains it leads to darkness, pain, suffering... just like every other choice we make in our daily lives..
-
is that according to the bible? if so why is there a discrepancy among denominations citing the bible as their doctrine?
i've heard catholics using purgatory?? where's that in the bible? was that a concession for people who couldn't fathom this punishment system? kinda like elevating mary in the renaissance because people were losing interest in a stern iconic jesus? or incorporating a saint for each season to accommodate the multi-god pagans who couldn't quite get use to having a single diety? sounds like humans trying to hard to cover for the inconsistencies...
-
Wow..deep for a Tuesday.
Religion is a tough concept for many. I personally would like to see the bible as God or whoever it was wrote it.
As you can tell from the above statement I am not a church going person. However I do believe in God, Bhudda, Allah, the Great Spirit or whoever you want to call it. I have a big problem with the church simply because they have lied in the past ie: "pay me 100 bucks to get out of pergatory"
-
MrFish-
Wow. Where did you read that any of the Christians posting here were admonishing you?
God gives us free will. Yes, he could have created us perfect, but did not. I don't know why.
God allows bad things to happen, true enough. Again, I don't know why. A lot of times the bad things that happen are a result of our own doing. Watch Jerry Springer and you get the idea.
The idea that all people are evil and flawed- is that so hard to understand? Do you deny that you or anyone else has had a selfish thought? Yup, that is evil. Everyone is flawed, even the hypothetical monk. What we are debating here really is relativism- a human concept. To God there is no relativism, only absolutism. Sin is sin, that's it.
I would never judge you and say you are a rotten person- I don't even know you. I do know that scripture says we are all evil in heart, and that is what I mean when I say everyone is flawed. I also know that scripture says that salvation only comes through the acceptance of Jesus as Savior and Lord. Whether you accept it or not makes little difference; He is Savior and Lord anyway. The only choice you have is to decide to follow Him or not.
I am not perfect. If I appear overly pious, sorry. If we were standing side-by-side I doubt you would see much difference between us. I am just as flawed as anyone, I have selfish, evil thoughts all the time. I have done things that are evil. I am a sinner. The one difference between us is that I acknowledge the fact I am a sinner and that Jesus is the only way I can be saved.
My intent in all that I do is to do the right thing, and yes, that matters. I do recognize that I will ultimately fall short, but I should continue to try regardless. I ask for forgiveness for my sins. I ask for God's guidance in my life. I thank Him for the many things He does for me.
Pious- maybe. But I am not sure you understand what it really means to be a Christian. Being a Christian means understanding that you accomplish nothing without God. In that context it has quite the opposite meaning you assign to it. Being a Christian is about denying one's self for the good of others, not standing over them in judgement.
-
had nothing to do with you kieran read this:
"for those that don't [believe] no explanation will suffice..
nitpickers, hair splitters, whatever it takes to justify a self satisfying life style you've chosen this time round."
that's the voice of christian righteousness insulting people who doubt the ridiculous bible story and calling their doubt petty and trivial. the same faith whose leaders killed people for daring to suggest the earth went round the sun. the bible is ripe with inconsistencies yet it is supposed to be the divinely inspired work of god and unquestionable in its authority.
how many angels were present at the empty sepulcher btw fter jesus resurrection? it isn't hair-splitting or nit-picking it is exposing flaws in a book that is supposed to be the perfect word and commandment of god. it obviously isnt.the point is:
if you can doubt part of it - why believe any of it? any part then has an equal chance of being incorrect if any one part of it is flawed.
so maybe you can answer my question: you are ok with the hypothetical monk going to hell for infinity for not professing his faith in christ? you feel the punishment fits the "crime"?
-
Wow, this well got deep quick.
OK, here is my take on the
whole thing.
We know it is all Eves fault
and ain't we all lucky they
waited awhile to outlaw incest?
I think if God exists he, she or
it has a very distorted sense of humor.
Man invented the Gods, religion is
just another power structure.
And won't I be amazed if I die and
wake up in hell?
-
Originally posted by StSanta:
Atheist, you mean? :)
Am picky about that particular word :).
Doh! yeah, sorry. I'm usually good at spelling, i guess I'm slipping in that department. blah! :D
oooh, i got rated. 4 stars! thank ya. :)
[ 07-31-2001: Message edited by: mortis ]
-
so maybe you can answer my question: you are ok with the hypothetical monk going to hell for infinity for not professing his faith in christ? you feel the punishment fits the "crime"?
It doesn't matter what I am ok with, that is the problem. The point to accepting Jesus is your Savior is that you recognize His control in your life. If you do not allow God to control your life, you are not following Him. If you do not follow Him, you cannot join Him in heaven.
No Christian cheers when anyone follows the road to destruction. Even God states in scripture it is His will that all be saved. The trouble there is He gave everyone the choice.
There are reasons for the analogy of parenthood with the relationship of man to God. We understand things our children don't (but oftentimes think they do). And just like God we are not happy when our children decide to do things they know are against our wishes. We sometimes even have to let them suffer for their decisions, whether or not they intended ill by those decisions.
-
Wow. Didn't mean for it to get this involved, but I should have known better. Though a Buddhist myself now, I have nothing but respect for other religions as well. The question of existence is integral to who we are, and one that should be faced each and every day
-
same old christian buzzwords and phrases....same old christian vagueness and evasion when the tough questions come up.
-
Mrfish-
Ask me a question about inconsistencies in the Bible, and I will work on the christian perspective, without the fluff, vagueness, etc. I tend to get annoyed at christians who are vague and so on, and if you give me a few days, I'll do some research on your issue(s) and come up with something. I'm talking evidence too, hard argument for the christian perspective. Don't get me wrong here, though, I am not trying to convert you, but I want a shot at this. As christians, we are called to know the reasons why we believe what we do, and I have spent some time lately trying to back up my own faith with evidence, though I have been a believer for many years now (grew up with it, finally decided that the faith needed to be my own and not just my family tradition). I'll give you the christian point of view, citing my references, and you can decide on your own.
-Greese
-
thanks greese i appreciate your tenacity!
you should know- i am no stranger to the christian faith. an argument happened at my birth because my father - a german catholic insisted that i be baptised at birth and go through all the little steps to enlightenment.
my mother - a down-home southern church of christ fundamentalist insisted that i would be damned to hell if i didnt get fully immersed at an age in which i could make the decision consciously. i was baptised twice!! :) talk about insurance!? sprinkled as a baby in a catholic church and fully immersed at a creek in oklahoma when i was 11.
not being able to stand the strict interpretations of either sect i became an episcopalian on my own due to their tolerance.also i have a little over 12 units in college spent on religious studies as electives and humanities credits.
i even won a free bible in vacation bible school one year for bringing in the most unconverted newcomers(5 as i recall). as a kid i preached to my parents, i preached to school friends i even preached to my dog! as an adult i had trouble making sense of the doctrine.
i decided to give up on church after 1000 or more sundays of conflict, hypocrisy, scandals and money grubbing. i have studied pre-mahayana buddhism since 1997 but calling myself a buddhist would be an insult to those who really try and understand the dhamma(or dharma depending on your language). calling my self an existentialist would be closer but still not 100% accurate. the point is i am not unfamiliar with the bible. i have a simple question:
"will the hypothetical monk go to hell?"
if the answer is "no", then i have a second question:
"where will he go?"
thanks for your help :)
-
Originally posted by mrfish:
same old christian buzzwords and phrases....same old christian vagueness and evasion when the tough questions come up.
How was I evasive? I answered you directly and honestly- it doesn't matter what I think about the situation. I explained to you how the acceptance of Jesus as Lord and Savior is integral to salvation, and that is what is important. You must have missed that point.
I also said no Christian is happy about a lost soul. What left is there for me to say? What specifically do you wish to hear from me? That I am glad someone burns in hell because they don't think like I do? That seems to be the corner you are trying hard to paint me into. Well, sorry to say that isn't so.
Do I think anyone, regardless of how faultless they perceive themselves to be, can get into heaven without accepting Jesus? No. Not one. Nada. That's pretty direct now, isn't it?
I don't want to come over as sanctimonious; but if you can take what I said before as mere rhetoric, I don't really think you are listening. Do you think this is the first time the old "what about a really great guy who doesn't confess to Jesus" argument has been thrown out there? Want to talk buzzwords and phrases? That argument is as old as Christianity. It's awful, I know, to think that a person can lead a "good life" and be damned, but if this is what you think you are fundamentally flawed in your conception of the relationship of God and man. Man cannot make himself perfect. Man cannot get to heaven unless he is perfect (sinless). Only Jesus can wash away the sin, allowing man to be perfect and able to enter heaven.
Now, if your argument is over baptism, ok, I can understand where people argue over the merits of that act. If you want to talk about salvation, Jesus is the only way.
-
Originally posted by Kieran:
Now, if your argument is over baptism, ok, I can understand where people argue over the merits of that act. If you want to talk about salvation, Jesus is the only way.
Do you feel that baptism is an important part of becoming a Christian?
-
The arguement for/against baptism is its purpose. It is symbolic of washing one's sin away. Some believe the ritual is vital, others don't. I am not sure what I think about that. In my personal experience I know I was saved before the baptism, as I felt the hand of God touch me. That occured when I realized I needed God in my life- that is, it happened at the point of revelation. The act of baptism to me is a covenant with God to follow him.
-
Originally posted by Kieran:
Do I think anyone, regardless of how faultless they perceive themselves to be, can get into heaven without accepting Jesus? No. Not one. Nada. That's pretty direct now, isn't it?
yes it is thank you. so the monk will be punished in a lake of fire for eternity. settles that question.
-
Mrfish-
I am working on a solid answer for your question.
In the meantime, I suggest two books that I have found to be VERY good at addressing the difficult questions. They were written by a guy who was an atheist, and a legal writer for the Chicago Tribune. He recreates his exploration into christianity, which included all of these questions.
Lee Strobel is the author
"The Case For Christ" (read first)
"The Case For Faith"
Very interesting reading.
-Greese
-
Personally I think the Christian corner is a real cop-out.
Now, the Islamic lot, theres a religion I could respect. Whens the last time a Christian strapped on a couple of kilos of C4 and did an impromptu 4th of July Solo Display? Now thats what I call faith. Nada, they just do the old "Jesus died for our sins" and munch down on another cracker and wash it down with a bottle of sparkling-grape-juice.
-
thanks greese but i knew the answer before i asked it. i just want to see people acknowldge they worship a cruel god.
since no one who denies christ as the messiah can get into heaven then the poor monk in my example is doomed. there is only heaven and hell so he is going to hell to burn forever.
have you ever been burned? i touched a hot ember in a pile of ahses trying to dig out a rock once and only had my hand there for 1/16 of a second max. it was in excruciating pain for 2 days afterword.
accoring to christian doctrine my hypothetical monk nows feels this agony for eternity.
what kind of cruel god gives someone 60-70 years to learn all they need to know and reach enlightenment and then - even if they have been righteous still throws them in a lake of fire for all eternity?
what are the sins of my monk? no killing no rape no theft - about the worst thing he ever did was say- dislike someone. how many years of lake of fire will it take for him to pay that off? 10-20 minutes? NO eternity!!
most people i know at the age of 25 barely know what to do with the rest of their lives but if they haven't accepted jesus yet their eternal fate of suffering is sealed.
sick.
-
Originally posted by mrfish:
yes it is thank you. so the monk will be punished in a lake of fire for eternity. settles that question.
Yep mrfish, it does. It would be nice if we could all just say "You're ok, I'm ok" Let's just all get along, but Christians are supposed to follow the teachings of the Bible. The Bible teaches that you must...
1.Hear Hebrews 11:6; Romans 10:17; Revelation 2:7
2.Believe Hebrews 11:6; Mark 16:16; Acts 16:31
3.Repent Luke 13:3; Acts 2:38; 17:30
4.Confess Mathew 10:32-33; 16:16; Acts 8:37-38; Romans 10:10
5.Be Baptized Mark 16:15-16; Acts 2:38; 10:48; 22:16; 1st Peter 3:21
6.Live Faithfully 2nd Peter 1:4-11; 1st Corinthians 10:12; 9:27 2nd Peter 2:20-22
...to be a Christian. There are a lot of denominations (ie. some baptists) who would have you believe that all ya gotta do is believe in Christ and you're going to Heaven. Some tell ya all ya gotta do is say the "sinners prayer" to be saved. Well, the sinners prayer is not even in the Bible. I was raised in a baptist church, and there are things that are done in a baptist church (or not done) that are not even in the Bible. Like, for starters, why is it called the Baptist church? Why would you want to name your church after John the Baptist? He was a great man, but aren't we supposed to worship Christ according to the scriptures? Some denominations are way out there, Catholics for instance, the word Catholic appears not once in the Bible. Traditions of men taking the place of commands of God.
The church I attend with my wife and 3 kids now is one that is modeled after the early Christian church. We follow the scriptures as best we can. If there's areas where we are straying from the scriptures it is not because we aren't trying.
mrfish, I'm sorry to hear of your problems earlier in life. Sounds like a tragedy. I hope that you'll give it another try.
Vulcy, that's not real funny. We're trying to have a semi-serious discussion here.
[ 07-31-2001: Message edited by: hblair ]
-
Do I think anyone, regardless of how faultless they perceive themselves to be, can get into heaven without accepting Jesus? No. Not one. Nada. That's pretty direct now, isn't it?
- Kieran
I have run across this in discussions with people from Maranatha(?) as well. What I find ironic is that in the Roman Catholic faith, this is not true. A good agnostic could find themselves in a christian heaven, according to the teachings I had from the Capuchin priests in high school. Same thing for a Buddhist or Muslim, and so on. I distinctly remember this, because we put these questions to our teacher, Father George. We even asked if an atheist could conceivably make it into heaven. He was very disagreeable with the idea, but acknowledged that it was theoretically possible for such a thing to transpire.
-
i hear ya hb - i just dont feel the punishment fits the crime for non-believers. especially when they have lived as righteous people in every other sense. that doesnt suggest a loving god, rather a cruel one.
i do have a lot of respect for anyone who sticks to a faith that has a high moral standard regardless of my personal opinion. especially in a world that could use a dose of humility and compassion.
jesus is still a hero of mine if even if i dont see him as a god. i have a huge poster sized framed picture of him on my wall that i got from a greek orthodox fundraiser in town.
jesus' actions against the money lenders in the temple are my favorite. it is the best scene in the bible in my opinion and sums up everything that is good about honest rebellion. i also appreciate his teachings that devalue the material world over the spiritual and encourage nonviolence.
just cant bite down on that hell thing.dont seem right. lotta good people are going to end up suffering way more than is fair if that's true. if a god is up there he'd at least be fair.
-
thanks greese but i knew the answer before i asked it. i just want to see people acknowldge they worship a cruel god.
And I knew from the start your question was insincere, as you had already arrived at your conclusion.
Let me turn it around for you. Do you think you are perfect? Do you know anyone that is?
You make it sound like it is hopeless for the monk; hardly- he has the same choice everyone has. To not recognize Jesus as Savior is rebellion. It is saying "No thanks, I'll do it my way."
Sin separates you from God, pure and simple. Sin is sin is sin. Tough as it is to understand, anyone that sins is just as good or bad as the next fellow. This flies in the face of worldly convention (you mean a shoplifter is a guilty as an axe-murderer in God's eyes? Yes!), yet it makes sense to the believer. God will not allow sin in heaven. You must be made sinless before you can enter heaven. You cannot do this yourself.
Your innocent monk you spoke of will have had the opportunity to turn to Christ before his demise. If he fails to recognize Christ he risks eternal damnation. And as "good" a life as he may lead, are you saying he is sinless?
So, you wanted to hear someone admit they worship a cruel God? You didn't hear that from me. I worship an absolute God, one that says "these are the rules" and those rules apply all the time.
Greece, you may not appreciate the approach I am taking with Mr.Fish. Sorry, I can back this up with scripture but he has already indicated he believes the Word is inconsistant. I don't believe my quoting the Word anymore is going to worth the time.
-
Leonid-
Theoretically, if a person is not given the opportunity to know Christ or God then it would be possible. Still, God gives us opportunities and waits for us to come to Him.
Luke 15 tells of the prodigal son. The son is allowed to go his own way. In time he comes to suffer for choosing his own way, not staying in the ways of his father. When he finally realizes his mistake he returns to his father, and finds him waiting with open arms. Had he not returned, he would have expired because of the choices he made.
Luke doesn't say he was evil in the sense of stealing, killing, etc. He said, "the younger son got together all he had, set off for a distant country and there squandered his wealth on wild living." Luke 15:13 He was merely foolish with his money in the worldly sense, but in the biblical analogy he had chosen to go his own way instead of following his father, and it brought about his ruin.
You're given a choice. If you make the wrong choice you will likely suffer the consequences, yet you can always be forgiven, at any time.
-
if greese has a convincing argument i'll change my mind, kieran. at least he has the faith that the bible holds an answer that will convince even me.
"you mean a shoplifter is a guilty as an axe-murderer in God's eyes? Yes"
so they should be punished the same too?
"God will not allow sin in heaven"
that's correct - instead all levels of sin are grouped together into an eternal nightmare.
"You're given a choice. If you make the wrong choice you will likely suffer the consequences, yet you can always be forgiven, at any time. "
so long as you are alive you mean - all that biz about the prodigal son occured before his death. if he had died it would have been too late. once you die you are spending the rest of time suffering horrors. so really you have a few short years to get it perfect.
my value system insists that the punishment fit the crime. i wouldn't beat a child for lying to me i can't follow a god who would condemn a good man for all of time. god is eternal and we are a vapor in time. he should be more patient with is children and not send them to suffer for ever for such meneal sins.
[ 07-31-2001: Message edited by: mrfish ]
-
Wow.. lemme kick the can once.. see what pops out. Identify the author.. and dispute his observations... if you can. :)
"God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks, please. Cash and in small bills."
(really.. scary ain't it??)
" History does not record anywhere at any time a religion that has any rational basis. Religion is a crutch for people not strong enough to stand up to the unknown without help. But, like dandruff, most people do have a religion and spend time and money on it and seem to derive considerable pleasure from fiddling with it"
(now which testament was that...?)
"Sin lies only in hurting other people unnecessarily. All other sins are invented nonsense. (Hurting yourself is not sinful--just stupid.)"
(we need rules, sure... but who's to say we need theirs?)
"The most ridiculous concept ever perpetrated by H.Sapiens is that the Lord God of Creation, Shaper and Ruler of the Universes, wants the sacharrine adoration of his creations, that he can be persuaded by their prayers, and becomes petulant if he does not recieve this flattery. Yet this ridiculous notion, without one real shred of evidence to bolster it, has gone on to found one of the oldest, largest and least productive industries in history."
(vengance is Mine!!!)
"Anyone who can worship a trinity and insist that his religion is a monotheism can believe anything... just give him time to rationalize it."
(HEADLINE:.. Religion Debunked, Theologists Not Amused)
"There is an old, old story about a theologian who was asked to reconcile the Doctrine of Divine Mercy with the doctrine of infant damnation. 'The Almighty,' he explained, 'finds it necessary to do things in His official and public capacity which in His private and personal capacity He deplores.' "
(i kinda liked that one. :))
"potatos perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly. "
(hehehhe.. now THATS on the money)
"The faith in which I was brought up assured me that I was better than other people; I was saved, they were damned ...Our hymns were loaded with arrogance -- self-congratulation on how cozy we were with the Almighty and what a high opinion he had of us, what hell everybody else would catch come Judgment Day."
(Oh yah. Burn in hell; baby!! :D)
" I've never understood how God could expect His creatures to pick the one true religion by faith - it strikes me as a sloppy way to run a universe. "
(now then; what was it the buddists were saying about muhommed??)
-
Originally posted by hblair:
...to be a Christian. There are a lot of denominations (ie. some baptists) who would have you believe that all ya gotta do is believe in Christ and you're going to Heaven.
Here's why:
John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
-
mr.fish,
There really is no use in getting upset about the belief system of Christianity. I made a choice over a decade ago to leave my faith of birth, Roman Catholicism, and I suspect you may have had a similar decision in your life. We have made our choice. Kieran merely states what his faith demands he believe in, as well he surely does. There is nothing wrong in that. Nowhere has Kieran stated that he must shun us, because of our decision. As far as Kieran is concerned, our choice was made with God, not him.
Besides, there has to be some sort of mutual respect among faiths, no matter how resolute one faith may be in its belief.
-
I doubt it. You have already interpreted something completely different from what I have said in order to confirm what you already believe. Your question for me was very transparent, illucidating clearly your intent. You knew the answer I would have to give, and your response to that answer was already in the can. But, rather than examine the explanation I offered for the answer to your question you jumped right to "I just wanted to hear a Christian admit they worship a cruel God." Indeed you have called such explanations:
"...same old christian buzzwords and phrases....same old christian vagueness and evasion when the tough questions come up."
The truth is in the Bible, but unless you have an open mind about it you will never see it. It is like when Jesus would tell parables; the truth was hidden from most of the people, even though the analogies were quite clear. If you heart and mind aren't prepared to hear the truth you will simply wait for your opportunity to knock holes in it.
Leonid, that is it to a "T". I work with unbelievers, I grew up in a family of atheists, and I think they are all good people. I speak to them about God when the opportunity presents itself, but I certainly don't hold myself above them nor do I shun them at all. You are exactly right, their decisions are between them and God. I don't think of myself as better than anyone in God's eyes. I am not perfect, not even close.
-
HB who said I was joking? Seriously Christians talk about how much faith you should have in god etc etc, but look at the Islamic guys... thats the ultimate FAITH. None of that give us your $$$ and we'll deliver you. Its a raw religion which says give me your LIFE.
Hang, when some of my buddhist friends first came to NZ, the people who helped them get here immediately rolled them into a Christian church. For a few months they went, and really got into it and the ideas etc. Then one day one of the Church crowd went round to their house. He saw the buddhist shrines, pictures etc, and told them they must destroy these (or chuck em out or whatever) as these went against the teachings of God. Their response was "why can't we believe both at once?", the church guy said "because thats the way of god".
Well, they said nice religion but see ya later bud, and went back to just buddhism. Buddhism in its purest form is merely a way of life, not a religion. The difference in openness to new ideas between these people and the Christian community is phenomonal isn't it? (and in my opinion refreshing).
Religion is many things: its a primitive form of government; its a way to explain all those things we don't understand (admit the Sun revolves around the Earth or we will BURN you heretic!); its a way to cope with the fact that we are mortal, and when we die the only place we go is the gut of a worm!
Originally posted by Hangtime:
" I've never understood how God could expect His creatures to pick the one true religion by faith - it strikes me as a sloppy way to run a universe. "
(now then; what was it the buddists were saying about muhommed??)
-
Originally posted by Sandman_SBM:
Here's why:
John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Yes, that's probably the most well known verse of the Bible. Very comforting. But read the verses before and after that, did Christ say that was ALL a person needs to do? Read the verses below, they tell us that we must repent of our sins, but nowhere does it say that repenting is all that is required:
Luke 13:1 There were present at that season some that told him of the Galilaeans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices.
Luke 13:2 And Jesus answering said unto them, Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things?
Luke 13:3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.
Luke 13:4 Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem?
Luke 13:5 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.
-------------------------------------
The following verses say ya gotta believe and be baptized, they don't mention that baptism is ALL ya gotta do:
Mar 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
My point is that there is more than just one thing to be done to be a righteous Christian.
Assumption is the mother of all screw-ups, you gotta know your Bible, and be a Student of the Bible.
-
Well said, HBlair.
Vulcan, ever hear of that "Throw the Christians to the lions" thingy? ;) Are you not aware of missionary work done around the world? Ever hear of Mother Teresa?
I could argue that in some ways it is easier to commit one final act of allegience than it is to suffer a lifetime of discomfort in silence. I am not in any way discounting the commitment of the Islamic religion; but are you really saying Islam is better because its followers make great human bombs?
-
Originally posted by Vulcan:
HB who said I was joking? Seriously Christians talk about how much faith you should have in god etc etc, but look at the Islamic guys... thats the ultimate FAITH. None of that give us your $$$ and we'll deliver you. Its a raw religion which says give me your LIFE.
I thought we were talking about Christians here, not just people who said they were Christians. You'll know a real Christian by his fruits (deeds)
Anybody who says "gimme your money to go to heaven" is *not* a Christian.
[ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: hblair ]
-
the question was :
does the monk go to hell?
your "answer" was:
"It doesn't matter what I am ok with, that is the problem.(that's not an answer) The point to accepting Jesus is your Savior is that you recognize His control in your life.(that's not an answer and contains two buzzphrases) If you do not allow God to control your life, you are not following Him.(that's closer but no cigar still and ripe with rhetoric) If you do not follow Him, you cannot join Him in heaven.(so where do you go if you dont join him - almost an answer, you were close there)
No Christian cheers when anyone follows the road to destruction.(the buddhist monk in my example was on a road to destruction?) Even God states in scripture it is His will that all be saved.(so whats the purpose of creating evil as an option is it a game where the losers suffer for eternity?) The trouble there is He gave everyone the choice.(still no answer)
There are reasons for the analogy of parenthood with the relationship of man to God.(does this still pertain to the question of wheher the monk goes to hell or not?) We understand things our children don't (but oftentimes think they do). And just like God we are not happy when our children decide to do things they know are against our wishes. We sometimes even have to let them suffer for their decisions(is that one of the mysterious hints i should have deciphered?), whether or not they intended ill by those decisions."(nope-no answer)
you should maybe leave the mysterious parables to jesus. i am looking for an answer more like "yes he goes to hell" or "no, some other thing happens"
the fact that i already knew what you would say has been mentioned in your previous threads and i have already answered that charge. i'm sorry it seems to be your only foothold in this discussion but i've said it once i'll repeat - yes i do know what the bible says but if you can explain to me that i am mistaken i will change my mind. that stands for every opinion i hold.
"I work with unbelievers, I grew up in a family of atheists, and I think they are all good people" - and according to you they will all suffer eternally when they die. do you ever think of that when you are hangin' with em? does the punishment of eternal fire seem adequate for their sins?
when i say i just want people to admit they believe in this wacked out god this is the root of it. people can respect their friends and family and still believe that they should fry eternally when they die. in admitting it i'm hoping the absurdity of it will surface.
"The truth is in the Bible, but unless you have an open mind about it you will never see it." - no that's what this thread is about. the real truth is not inconsistent and cruel. the bible is full of inconsistencies and therefore can not be the truth. again you never answered my question btw: how many angels and how many marys were at the sepulcher? being a christian is the furthest thing from having an open mind - it requires you to turn off your logic completely and have faith.
i do respect people with other faiths so long as they are humble and down to earth about it. and especially when they can explain what they believe with clarity instead of rhetoric. i can't stand people who prance around saying things like "i hang out with sinners all the time" wow how generous. i am not trying to change your mind only to point out that christians have some harsh doctrine and should just admit it.
why don't you just say "yes - the monk will fry for eternity and that punishment is just and fair because the lord says so" ? i dont need explanations, i can draw my own conclusions from the answer. if your god supports this thats all i need to know - save the sermon. why pad it - if you believe it own it.
-
In the Beginning God created the Universe V1.0.
God's publisher demanded he rush his creation out the door whether it was finished or not. After many peoples cried of the travesty God was forced to release version 1.01.
Even after the fact cries are still heard that the Flight Model is not right.
Wingnut
-
"The truth is in the Bible, but unless you have an open mind about it you will never see it."
Your only open minded if you agree with ME.
So, was Joseph pissed that god nailed his wife first?
"Shall not covet thy Neighbours wife"
Guess god has his own set of rules. ;)
If Jesus was a Jew... Did he believe himself to be the Messiah?
"Jesus was a terrorist, enemy of the State"
-
Mr.Fish-
I assumed that you could draw a conclusion from my points.
posted 08-01-2001 12:58 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the question was :
does the monk go to hell?
your "answer" was:
"It doesn't matter what I am ok with, that is the problem.(that's not an answer) The point to accepting Jesus is your Savior is that you recognize His control in your life.(that's not an answer and contains two buzzphrases) If you do not allow God to control your life, you are not following Him.(that's closer but no cigar still and ripe with rhetoric) If you do not follow Him, you cannot join Him in heaven.(so where do you go if you dont join him - almost an answer, you were close there)
No Christian cheers when anyone follows the road to destruction.(the buddhist monk in my example was on a road to destruction?) Even God states in scripture it is His will that all be saved.(so whats the purpose of creating evil as an option is it a game where the losers suffer for eternity?) The trouble there is He gave everyone the choice.(still no answer)
That was my mistake, I suppose. Admit it, you didn't want a conversation, you wanted to score points. That still is your point. Now you are insinuating I am just posturing for you. Seems to me you have a chip on your shoulder and I was just stupid enough to knock it off. Your contempt for Christianity drips from every word you write.
You insult my God, expect me to accept your interpretation of my God, and think I am being pompous for not doing so. Sorry if that upsets you, but that is pretty much the way I read you at the moment. Nothing you have said, not one word, is any new argument against Christianity. If I fall back on rhetoric you have surely done the same.
Yes, I think about my friends and family in eternal damnation. I don't want that. That is why I talk to them about God. Getting upset at God about it won't change the truth about it, will it?
The Pure Monk will spend eternity in Hell if he doesn't repent. I don't know how many ways I can say it, but it doesn't matter how I feel about it- it changes nothing.
Being a Christian doesn't mean turning off your logic BTW- it does require logic be coupled with faith. Albert Einstein once said "the more I know, the more I know I don't know." Sometimes you have to accept on faith there are truths out there you don't fully understand.
I'm sure I don't overestimate your intelligence so much that I was wrong to present parables as an example- parables that, BTW, are quoted from the Bible. The "Prodigal Son" is applicable to your monk in that if he rejects Jesus he is like the lost son who chooses his own way. He can choose to come back and God will rejoice. If he does not come back he will suffer gravely. You say, "But what if he dies young and doesn't get the chance?" He does get the chance- how could a monk never hear of God?
We are all like the Prodigal Son, we all can come to God no matter what. The door is always open - yes, while we are alive - but it is always open. That isn't very mysterious, is it?
i do respect people with other faiths so long as they are humble and down to earth about it. and especially when they can explain what they believe with clarity instead of rhetoric. i can't stand people who prance around saying things like "i hang out with sinners all the time" wow how generous. i am not trying to change your mind only to point out that christians have some harsh doctrine and should just admit it.
Number one, I have admitted it was harsh, but fair. Number two, you are now twisting my words very unfairly (I hang out with sinners all the time). That remark came as a response to Leonid's very accurate point that I wasn't trying to insult or deride or shun you. You have turned it into an insult towards me, however. Number three- you allude to your belief (I must assume you mean me) that I am just prancing around playing Christian. I am not hiding any ugly truths from sight. You have access to the very same Bible I have, now wouldn't I be foolish to try to hide the Word from you? My posts have been attempts to clarify my church's beliefs.
We are now moving to the place where we are not having an objective discussion any longer. If you truly think I don't believe what I say, or that I don't practice what I am posting, what point is there in antagonizing you further? If you are going to dismiss every point I make as irrelevant (which, BTW, you have) why should I aggravate myself further? The way I see it, for me to continue this conversation with you will do more harm than good.
I told you that quoting scripture to you would not work- you then threw a jab out there saying "at least XXXX has faith enough in the Bible to try to explain it". I then give you a very simple to understand parable to illucidate a point and you return with a "you should maybe leave the mysterious parables to jesus. i am looking for an answer more like "yes he goes to hell" or "no, some other thing happens".
You can't have it both ways. I don't seem to have a way of communicating with you effectively unless I say, "Yes, you are absolutely right." I'm sorry, I just can't do that.
-
Chisel-
Go away, Troll. :rolleyes:
-
You're all still dancing around on the head of a pin trying to interpret the little shreds of evidence the Nazerene left behind (duly filtered by a bunch of power hungry Hellenic beaurocrats), and completly ignoring his younger brother; who left us the word of God written in scripture; and his family line on earth so that we may see his humanity for our selves.
What's all this BS of virgin births? Since when did God ever need to pull rabbits out of hats to impress us? Is he a conjurer for our entertainment?
There is no God but God.
-
Hblair... FWIW, I was raised Baptist. My grandfather was a Baptist minister.
I consider myself an atheist. That little questionnaire pegged me as a humanist. :)
-
" Albert Einstein once said "the more I know, the more I know I don't know." "
funny you should quote a sinner who is burning in hell to make your point.(albert einstein was a jew afterall)
"how could a monk not know of god?"
- are you for real kieran? :) he was a buhddist monk in my story what if he lived in china or india at a monastary? christians arent the only people who dedicate a life to spirituality.
unless of course christian missionaries came and put him in chains and dragged him away with his village burning like they used to he might never have heard of 'your' god. travel abroad some time - there are places where no one cares about christ and they still get along just fine.
you are down to critisizing my argument now but it has only been factual and logical from the start. yours is nothing but dogma. you use your faith to argue your faith. under that rule i might as well make up a god named 'correctus' which appeared to me in a vision and told me i was right and you were wrong. it is just as unprovable.
you want a parable? here's one for you:
a wizzened old man with a flowing white beard took six toddlers to the park and set a plate of delicious candy in front of each. he told them not to touch it and then went to hide in the bushes to observe. 4 toddlers immediately grabbed the candy - 1 hesitated then grabbed it only for a second and only 1 resisted completely as instructed. when the old man came back he took the good baby and dumped lighter fluid over the others setting them on fire. as they were screaming "why would you torture us like that" he said in a pouty voice "well you had your chance it's too late now hmpf" and walked away with his saved soul.
if there is an eternal god then surely we are children - if he cared about and loved his people he wouldn't give them a snapshot in time to determine their eternal fate on the basis of an old story riddled with inconsistencies. it sets up so many to fail! why would you create a world of temptations just to see how many of your children will fail so you can torture them forever? yeah god gives us choice but would you give a 2 yr old a choice with such grave consequences? that's my point - not to insult you but to insult the idea of this cruel invisible god. if you want to believe that fine.
i'll ask one last time since you have danced around this question 3 times. then i'll drop it assuming you cant defend the bible on this one:
how many marys and how many angels were present at the sepulcher after jesus' resurrection according to the gospel? the accurate and inspired word of god should contain a single answer right? is that an irrational argument? is that full of contempt? i think it's only purpose is to expose an inconsistency so don't get offended.
[ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: mrfish ]
-
mrfish
maybe you need to relocate to another part of the country for a better pov.
May I suggest anywhere east of SF :)
mucho anger in your posts sir
ps
all this talk of "going" to heaven or hell...
psst .. look around .. you are already there! Where? that's up to you...
[ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: Eagler ]
-
you are down to critisizing my argument now but it has only been factual and logical from the start. yours is noting but dogma. you use your faith to argue your faith. under that rule i might as well make up a god named 'correctus' which appeared to me in a vision and told me i was right and you were wrong. it is just as unprovable.
This is what I mean. How am I to refute your arguments against God if I am not able to draw proof? If I quote the Bible I am just using dogma in your opinion. If I don't I am just using catch phrases and buzz words.
FWIW, I don't think your argument is all that logical or based on facts. You have based it on misconceptions and distortions. You use hypothetical situations as if they are truths. You grab minutae out of context to arrive at a preconceived conclusion. It isn't scientific any more than my argument is the work of a Bible scholar. Surely you see this? Or have you so dismissed my words by now that you can't see that?
Everyone knows there are different versions of the Bible- how could so many offshoots of Christianity exist if that was not so? At the core they are the same. I can peacefully co-exist with other religions for this reason. I feel if the opportunity to witness presents itself I should witness- that is what my religion says I should do. If someone asks how I feel about a particular point of religion I will offer an opinion. It is also a way to challenge yourself to expand in knowledge of God, and to test your faith. Sometimes (as here) it isn't all that pleasant, but usually everyone learns something.
I would love to help you understand God better, but I don't think you really want to hear it, or I am not the person you need to hear it from. You want me to convert to your thinking of my God. If you understand the nature of anyone's belief system you must realize that isn't going to happen. I don't think I am going to convert you either. I did hope we could discuss this without the "I can't stand people like you" type stuff being thrown in.
-
as promised i will drop my question since you haven't answered it. i didnt ask about variations between versions of the bible - i asked what the text said about a specific event. you can use one bible, any bible any version - any denomination-one physical book. you wont answer it because it is inconsistent plain and simple.
your faith claims the bible is the one true word of god and divinely inspired. the one true word of god is therefore inconsistent. period.
and eagler : "all this talk of "going" to heaven or hell...psst .. look around .. you are already there! Where? that's up to you..."
no kidding friend!! i couldnt agree with you more - but that is NOT the christian pov is it?
[ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: mrfish ]
-
Originally posted by mrfish:
and eagler : "all this talk of "going" to heaven or hell...psst .. look around .. you are already there! Where? that's up to you..."
no kidding friend!! i couldnt agree with you more - but that is NOT the christian pov is it?
[ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: mrfish ]
Not exactly. Once I discovered that the Bible had any reference to reincarnation removed during one of its "revisions", I set out to figure it out the best way for my own journey. The Bible isn't perfect, but it is a very good guide, New Testament being easier to read/understand than the Old, to base your life principals on. All major religions/cultures preach the same thing, the base message is the same. It our human interpretations, usually for self gain, which screws the pooch.
<S>
-
Originally posted by Eagler:
Not exactly. Once I discovered that the Bible had any reference to reincarnation removed during one of its "revisions", I set out to figure it out the best way for my own journey. The Bible isn't perfect, but it is a very good guide, New Testament being easier to read/understand than the Old, to base your life principals on. All major religions/cultures preach the same thing, the base message is the same. It our human interpretations, usually for self gain, which screws the pooch.
<S>
if you started a religion based on those concepts i would shave my head and hand out flowers for it. i might even bring a tambourine. :D
<S>
-
as promised i will drop my question since you haven't answered it. i didnt ask about variations between versions of the bible - i asked what the text said about a specific event. you can use one bible, any bible any version - any denomination-one physical book. you wont answer it because it is inconsistent plain and simple.
your faith claims the bible is the one true word of god and divinely inspired. the one true word of god is therefore inconsistent. period.
And, as you clearly illustrate, you knew what you were going to say regardless of my answer. But here is what the Life Application Bible, New International Version- Tyndale, says,
Matthew 28:1-7:
After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb. There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightening, and his clothes were white as snow. The guards were so afraid him that they shook and became like dead men.
The angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples: 'He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.' Now I have told you."
Luke 24:1-10:
On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. while they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them. In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, "Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here; he is risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: 'The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.' Then they remembered his words.
When they came back from the tomb, they told all these things to the Eleven and to all the others. It was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary mother of James, and the others with them who told the apostles.
This is the conflict you are trying to point out, correct? You know the books of the Bible are a collection of different authors' works? You are aware they have been translated? You will undoubtedly use this fact to point out the fallacy of the Bible's truth, and I argue the opposite- the thread of truth woven throughout the Bible is consistent. The books are inspired by God.
By the way, you haven't answered my questions: Are you perfect? Do you know anyone who is? Do you believe anyone can lead a blameless life? Do you think anyone can erase the wrong they have done in their lives?
[ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: Kieran ]
-
Originally posted by Kieran:
By the way, you haven't answered my questions: Are you perfect? Do you know anyone who is? Do you believe anyone can lead a blameless life? Do you think anyone can erase the wrong they have done in their lives?
[ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: Kieran ]
no, no, no and no, but they can balance their wrong with right in a quest for balance. also many non-christians are repentant for their deeds, myself included, just not to your or any god.
[ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: mrfish ]
-
Originally posted by mrfish:
if you started a religion based on those concepts i would shave my head and hand out flowers for it. i might even bring a tambourine. :D
<S>
see you in the airport :)
-
C'mon... reconcile the Doctrine of Divine Mercy with the Doctrine of Infant Damnation.
Well?
-
Well, Hang... I thought you were just taking your jab. Didn't know you were serious.
Let me answer your question with a question: show me the reference where it states that infants that die are damned.
Here's a little something I dug up:
But a deeper question remains. What happens to the baby at death?
Many years ago, there was a man named Augustine. He held to a view that
led people to conclude that all babies are born in sin. I have a book
in my library that is very old. It is the 1902 edition of the Methodist
Discipline. On the article entitled "Of Original or Birth Sin," it
reads:
"Original sin standeth not in the following of Adam (as the
Pelagians do vainly talk), but it is the corruption of the nature of
every man, that naturally is engendered of the offspring of Adam,
whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and of his own
nature inclined to evil, and that continually." (Page 5). This is why
infant baptism is administered -- at z84 least why it was originally
administered. Again from the same book we read the minister's words
which must be used when administering baptism to an infant. It reads:
"Dearly beloved, forasmuch as all men are conceived and born in
sin, and that our Saviour Christ saith, Except a man be born of water
and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God: I beseech
you to call upon God the Father, through our Lord Jesus Christ, that of
his bounteous goodness he will grant to this child, now to be baptized
with water, that which by nature he cannot have: that he may be baptized
with the Holy Ghost, received into Christ's holy Church, and be made a
lively member of the same." (Page 219).
This is an ancient book -- it was written back in 1902 and stated
the view that since babies are born in sin they must be baptized in
order to have their corrupt nature removed. An old New England Psalter
(or prayer and hymn book) has the line: "In Adam's fall, we sinned all."
This is the theory known as total, inherited depravity. It opines that
since Adam and Eve fell by transgression in the Garden of Eden, all who
are born are born depraved, regardless of how good and holy their
parents may have been. What is called the "Adamic Nature" is
transferred to the child at birth just the same way its little traits
peculiar to it are given.
The truth about babies is that this doctrine is simply not true.
To offset the hideous doctrine that little babies are born as sinners we
have but to turn to the New Testament and read something about Christ
and little ones. One time when Jesus was teaching the people, a few of
the mothers in the crowd brought their little babies to Him just so He
could touch them. Listen to the passage -- Mark 10:13-16.
"Then they brought young children to Him, that He might touch them;
but the disciples rebuked those who brought them. But when Jesus saw
it, He was greatly displeased and said to them, 'Let the little children
come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of God.
Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as
a little child will by no means enter it.' And He took them up in His
arms, put His hands on them and blessed them."
That is sufficient to show clearly that babies are brought into
this world pure and sinless. God's kingdom is to be filled with the
quality one finds in children. That means that the kingdom of God must
be filled with those who trust and love the Lord -- not those born in
sin.
Another passage clearly refutes the absurd notion that children
come into the world guilty of the sins of someone else. Listen:
"The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not (did you get that
friends?) shall not (I repeat) bear the guilt of the father, nor the
father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous
shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon
himself" (Ezekiel 18:20.
There is a good story that helps explain all of this. It happened
to a man named Alexander Campbell. He was a young man preaching in
Virginia in the early 1800's and was trying to restore, to the best of
His ability, the preaching and practices of Christ and His apostles. He
determined not to be bound by z84 human disciplines and creeds, just
by the Bible itself. He was challenged by a Baptist preacher to
publicly debate the issue of infant baptism. At the time he was a
member of the Presbyterian church. The Presbyterians adopted the
practice of infant baptism being performed by sprinkling water on the
child a long time before that and Campbell has accepted it without
question. Campbell quickly signed the propositions to defend the
Presbyterian practice of infant baptism by sprinkling. The debate,
however, never was held. Mr. Campbell went to the Bible to find some
scriptural justification for the practice and found none. In addition
he found no basis for it since he learned quickly that the Bible does
not teach that all children are born in sin.
[ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: Kieran ]
-
The Bible is such a gargantuan collection of conflicting values that anyone can prove or disprove anything from it.
Explain Bapitsism. Original Sin. Limbo and Purgatory.
Is it not Christian dogma to damn an unbaptised infant to hell or it's nether regions?
Why the fancy dancing??
Theologians are never any help; they all continiously search in a dark cellar at midnight for a black cat that isn't there.
Religion is sometimes a source of happiness, and I would not deprive anyone of happiness. The great trouble with religion - any religion - is that a religionist, having accepted certain propositions by faith, cannot thereafter judge those propositions by evidence. One may bask at the warm fire of faith or choose to live in the bleak certainty of reason- but one cannot have both.
I choose reason.
-
So you admit you can't prove your point in scripture? You want to put me in the position of explaining an accusation you can't even substantiate?
Fancy dancing? I don't know what you mean, but that is twice in this thread I have been accused of avoiding questions I have answered. I don't know of any scripture that states that unborn children or infants that die are damned to hell. If you can provide such a reference I would be happy to discuss it with you.
I can't comment on purgatory or limbo as my religion doesn't include those concepts.
As for the other comments, you have stated you feel the Bible can be used to argue any point, so what should I say to you?
C'mon guys, if you want to talk about it, let's talk about it. What I am not about to do is to walk through 2,500 pages, page-by-page, disputing every single seeming conflict.
One thing I don't have to have faith about- that is the hand of God touched me, physically. I have felt it, it was undeniable. You may attempt to explain that away for me too, but I know what happened.
And you are so wrong about those of faith not examining beliefs. That is a stereotype perpetuated by unbelievers. How is one to avoid false prophets? How can one identify what is wrong or right? You and others suggest that to be a Christian means to turn your mind off. Statements like that tell me you have no idea what a Christian really is.
-
Living your beliefs takes courage.. I envy your divinity, having been touched by the hand of God.
I also live my beliefs, and while I do not believe in an all-knowing, all-seeing, all powerful Christian Dogma defined Diety, I do believe you to be a good person attempting to do good works.
Which changes not the reality that almost any organized sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so, and will follow it by suppressing opposition, subverting all education to seize early the minds of the young, and by killing, locking up, or driving underground all heretics.
Sectarian interpetations of the works that comprise the bible, in all its forms begat and continiues to beget senseless violence; hatred and absurdities that are an affront to reason and reality.
Yes; I know what it is to be a Christian.. like you; I was raised as one. How very odd that you should say that.
-
I apologize for starting this thread. It was not my intention for it to go in this direction.
:(
-
No anger here, Leonid. I feel I have upset a couple of the guys here perhaps, but I am not upset.
Hangtime, I was raised an atheist. I always sensed something was wrong with my life, and I found the answer in Christianity. When I came to the decision to follow Christ it was like -*BOOM*- rapture. I wish I could extend that experience to anyone who doubts.
I can't condemn anyone for not following the same path, that isn't for me to do. I find it surprising the three people that have debated religion with me on this BBS have all come from religious backgrounds. That you have all turned against religion is interesting.
-
I have one reason for turning my back on Christianity. It never felt honest. I went through the motions. I tried to believe it and I finally admitted to myself that I just couldn't buy into it. (It took me twenty years to say that.)
I've found one thing. True believers, the one's that don't need consensus or agreement from me are a joy to be around, no matter what their religion is.
[ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: Sandman_SBM ]
-
Wow. I was going to comment a day or 2 ago. Didn't realize that it got so heated.
Mr.Fish & Hangtime my I suggest the following books- Strobel's book (already mentioned), The Case for Christ is a good one. I think also good is C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity. Very heavy reading. It should be noted that both Strobel and Lewis were Aetheists at one point in their lives before becoming Christians.
First let me state that I'm definitely not the end-all be-all Christian apologetic. There will be hard questions that I won't be able to answer now...maybe never.
I wrestled with formulating some appropriate responses but it is taking much more effort to put it all together. So I humbly bring a few thoughts to the discussion complements of C.S. Lewis. Perhaps it will whet your appetite to read Mere Christianity. It is impossible for me to do a treatise of C.S. Lewis' work and much better for you to dive into it yourself.
Here are some tidbits-
These, then are the two points I wanted to make. First that human beings, all over the earth, have this curious idea that they ought to behave in a certain way, and cannot really get rid of it. Secondly, that they do not in fact behave in that way. They know the Law of Human Nature; they break it.
...Christianity simply does not make sense until you have faced the sort of facts I have been describing. Christiantiy tells people to repent and promises them forgiveness. It therefore has nothing (as far as I know) to say to people who do not know they have done anything to repent of and who do not feel they need any forgiveness. It is after you have realised that there is a real Moral Law, and Power behind that law, and that you have broken that law and put yourself wrong with that Power - it is after all this, and not a moment sooner, that Christianity begins to talk.
My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust?....Of course I could have given up my idea of justice by saying it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too - for the argument depended on the saying that the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my private fancies. Thus in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist - in other words, that the whole reality was senseless - I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality - namely my idea of justice - was full of sense. Consequently atheism turns out to be far too simple.
Forgive me for not answering your questions. Kieran has tried and I look forward to what Greese's responds with. I believe Mr. Lewis does a wonderful job of delving into some really deep questions and issues. After all, I believe that God did give us brains to reason with :).
Kieran, Greese, hblair, et al others I've missed- good to see other disciples of the Way here :).
[ 08-02-2001: Message edited by: dtango ]
-
Thanks for the quotes, Dtango. Certainly is another perspective.
Hey, I dropped a star! Guess I've come on strong, eh? ;)
-
Don't know- perhaps. I've lost a star as well for other things :eek: (though wasn't sure why!). Just means that their are differences of perspectives between people.
-
No anger here either... and I salute your courage and faith. I've determined that living life with an open mind, particularly when it comes to matters of religious faith; is preferable to the contrary. In pursuit of that... I always ask questions. My apologies for any angst.
"...and who knows... perhaps the horse will someday learn to sing."
<S>
-
My philosophy is simple:
"Your religion is none of my business -- please keep it that way!"
I think that about says all I want to say on the subject.
-
Psalms 83:18
-
I'm actually a zetetic..not that that matters (Just for the record). I want to say I have really enjoyed this thread for all POV's provided. It get's a little testy at times, but for a Religious discussion, I think you guys have been treating each other with more respect then I normally see in these discussions(The key I think). <S!> to you guys.
My question, which sort of ties in with what Leonid started this thread with is, doesn't the Bible state that 'Vengeance is the purview of Heaven, not of man.' I'm not sure on the exact quote, perhaps some of you know the exact quote? I am just curious as to the context within which it was placed and what exactly the quote is. Thanks.
-
King James Version Romans 12:19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
King James Version Psalms 94:1 O LORD God, to whom vengeance belongeth; O God, to whom vengeance belongeth, shew thyself.
Try http://bible.crosswalk.com/ (http://bible.crosswalk.com/)
[ 08-04-2001: Message edited by: Sandman_SBM ]
-
Heehe leonid you should know better...in this board there are 3 kind of threads bound to go over 100 posts.....religion, politics and N1K2s ;).
I dont think is bad to discuss this matters, what i think is bad is to keep a closed mind towards other's points instead of giving a deep thought to it.
What is me,(and I dont have even 1% the knowledge of religion that most people who have talked here), I am a christian. Not a catholic. I think there is a god and maybe for being raised as a catholic, in a catholic school (jesuits), I have a predisposition to believe in the catholic god. Still I dont think catholicism is right, and I'm a christian in a very very personal way.
First of all for all those who use the bible as a book of reference, be sure that the bible cant be used as a reliable reference, starting from the Genesis story we see lots of errors and contradictions. The Old Testament is a compendium of books wich show a god to be feared, a god who in some ways reaches the point of being cruel. Suddenly after Christ comes he turns into a God of Love, and our Father. The radical change does not make sense, sorry, and this is just one of the examples on how the bible is not reliable.
Now what I do believe is in Christ, in Jesus. Wich means that I believe in his message, and so I also believe in the Father. I believe in the message he gives, in the God of Love he talks about. I believe in that all of us humans are brothers.
I think there is a god up there, somewhere. And a god who knows better than us (not hard after reading some messages here ;)). I find curious that there is any kind of discussion wether the Jews, Budists, Animists, etc etc etc will be saved or will burn in hell for not believing in god. As I understand, he who is a good man, and follows the natural good/bad rules, will get saved regardless he is a christian or not.
I dont think there is a hell. I dont dare to say a word about what will happen after we die, because I think that ANYTHING we can think is not enough (we live and think in 4 dimensions, and within a very limited scope, so I simply believe that we can't really theorize about what will happen when we are freed of those rules).
On the other hand, I am sure that there is no hell, nor a Satan, red, with a tail, a fork and beard, who lives in a place full of flames to torture the souls of the damned forever.
I think that many conceptions we have about God, Jesus, after-life, etc, are purely human. I think that the Catholic church is a fraud (as almost all the churchs in the world). I think that sometimes the atheists (I hope I've spelled it right, santa :)) are closer to the truth than the ortodox religious people...because at least they look and believe on the natural laws of the good and bad. And if they are "natural laws" is because they were there, implemented on our nature. Who implemented them? :)
in other words, I believe that Santa will get saved even when he is a dirty atheist ;), but I think that many self-proclaimed religious authorities wont, even when they are christians and baptized. (whatever it means that they wont be saved...this is one of the few concepts I dont really understand). In fact I think that the whole discussion about if hte non-christians will be saved or not is simply moot. There have been lots of men in history, after Christ's message, who never heard a word of Christianism. And there were lots people who knew catholicism and refused to accept it. During 14 centuries the Church of Rome has been a place of corruption and immoral standards. To say that the people who were in that church were all saved while the others who werent crhistians were not, does not make sense, and I simply dont give it a second thought.
Well I?m talking too much and I am sure that noone cares of what I think :) but I wanted to give some thoughts on what do I think on this pollemic.
[ 08-05-2001: Message edited by: R4M ]
-
so ram, correct me if i misinterpret you please. you believe that:
- there is no hell or place where sinners and nonbelievers go after death.
- there is a heaven where good people go after death.
- you don't have to believe in or accept christ as the one true savior to go to heaven.
- baptism is irrelevant in determining your eternal disposition.
is that right? it seems to me that there are many posting here that believe in a 'christ-based' religion, but not biblical christianity. i think strict christians would want to make that disticntion in much the way that agnostics don't like being lumped with atheists.
-
Originally posted by R4M:
Now what I do believe is in Christ, in Jesus. Wich means that I believe in his message, and so I also believe in the Father. I believe in the message he gives, in the God of Love he talks about.
Originally posted by R4M:
I dont think there is a hell.
You just said you believe in Christ and his teachings, then a couple of sentences later, you say there is no hell. Christ said there was a hell, This is Christ himself speaking:
Mat 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
-
Maybe he's talking about Hellfire Ale?
-
Lol SOB :D
One thing I don't get is this whole burn in hell for eternity thing. How does that work exactly? Is it just hot enough to be uncomfortable? Or does it hurt? If it hurts, won't you pass out eventually due to pain? Then you wouldn't feel it I guess... so no biggie. Or, does Satan thrust smelling salts under yer nose so you remain awake to feel it? But I mean, yer prolly gonna pass out anyways through smoke inhalation, right? Or do you wear some kind of oxygen mask? I guess the sinners of the middle ages didn't get access to that technology though. What's Satan's budget anyways? (Hmm... I wonder if Satan has access to the internet... Maybe @home or AOL or something). Also, what if you have to go to the bathroom? Does he make you hold it while burning you? If not I would take that opportunity to try and make a break for it. Has anyone successfully escaped?
One thing that would be pretty cool is to see the peoples from all throughout history... like ancient and geographically remote cultures that ended up there simply because the missionaries didn't get to them in time to teach them about Jesus and stuff. I bet they're pretty pissed about that. Ah well, life aint fair. Erhm, the afterlife, anyways.
-
I have now access to the internet, gene manipulation and so forth.
It is true that in the good old days, we just built a big fire and threw people onto them for a bit, then took them off so they wouldn't pass out all the time and then threw them on again. So they burned in hellfire "forever2 in terms of having to repeat that bit forever, but they weren't actually on the fire forever.
Now, thanks to modern advances, we've got far more sophisticated equipment. My collection of Boy Band songs is one of the best. Also, we now genetically manipulate the CNS of people so they are in constant pain.
This has done wonders for my economy, as I've got a monopoly on pain killers. I should have thought about this before.
-
Originally posted by hblair:
You just said you believe in Christ and his teachings.
No, I say I believe in his MESSAGE. His "teachings" are based in the bible, a book written by humans, translated by humans and I'm sure that modified by humans :).
The message of Jesus, as I understand it is very simple:
"Love each other as I've loved you."
I think that this phrase sums it up pretty well. You dont need to believe in a god, a christ, a baptism, to save your soul (Even if you dont believe you have a soul). YOu have to respect and love your brothers, and try to act with good faith. You have to act according to the natural laws we all have since we are born.
Mrfish; no, I dont believe there is a hell. I dont know what heaven is, and that is the reason I dont make teories about it. I think is a status we can't even taste in our current life because our senses and minds are simply too closed in our perceptions of how is the world we live in.
Thus, I cant say what is exactly what the sinners have to "pay" for their sins because I dont know what "reward" do the good guys get after life.
Maybe the sinners have to live again, rebirth to live a painful life so he learns not to sin... Maybe is another thing. I dont know what it is, but If there is a God wich loves us and cares for us I wont EVER believe that such a god, claimed to be god of LOVE, sends souls to hell forever, to suffer in the eternal flames because in their terrenal lifes have been sinners.
I deny that and say that it is not possible. If God exists and is a God of Love, as I believe, then Hell can't exist.
[ 08-06-2001: Message edited by: R4M ]
-
MRFISH-
It's about time I answered your questions.
If there was an easy answer to these questions, I have no doubt many more people would be christinans. The truth is, that the answers take a lot of investigating, and hard evidence that I can't possibly write it all here. Read the books I reccomend, do a little footwork on your own, and YOU WILL come up with the same answers for yourself.
Regarding the inconsistencies of the New Testament, using your example of "how many Mary's and how many angels were at the Sepulcher", or how can the New Testament be inspired, when it appears as though there are some flaws, or inconsistencies?
First off, everything you need to answer this question is in a bok that I recomended to you, called "The Case For Christ". The author is far more eloquent and entertaning than I am. I will summarize what I have learned.
When it comes to eye-witness testimony, which is what the gospels (the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John)are, one thing that actually validates it are little inconsistencies. If several people went to a party, then were each separated some time later, they may each have different things to say about the party, who they saw there, what music was played, so on. It is not that they are wrong, it is that each took something different away from the event. If theeir stories matched identically, police might even invalidate the testimony because it appears "too perfect". If the New Testament gospels matched up exactly, it might show that the authors merely copied one another's stories. Also, we need to understand that the details that are in dispute are not ones that affect doctrine, they are details that appear inconsistent, but when put into context, and evaluated with other historical documents, etc. They are quite accurate.
The bottom line answer to your question, is that there might not be a clear answer, but what difference does it make how many Mary's and how many angels WERE there? Because of evidence I have investigated, and am only touching upon here, I have decided that the New Testament is solid truth, but it's a long complicated journey to reach this conclusion.
Your second question, regarding a good monk going to hell. This question, and others like it, are explored in a second book I highly reccommend, "The Case For Faith". I cannot do teh reading for you, I can only sum up what I know and hope that you will investigate it on your own.
The truth is, to directly answer your question, is that the "good" monk will go to Hell.
About Hell. I imagine that you, growing up in a fundamentalist home, God may have been painted as a "Ruler" who put a good check mark next to your name whenever you did something right, and a bad check every time you did something wrong. When it was time for you to be "judged", you had better hope you had lived up to God's expectations. Unfortunately, many fundamentalist denominations believe this is the case with God, and he'd rather send us "to a pit of boiling lava to spend eternity" than have someone who is less than righteous in his kingdom.
This is a very poor painting of the God of the Bible. The truth is, that there is no one who is righteous enough to make it on his or her own, but God has provided the fix to the problem, in Jesus. God wants us to be with him, in his Kingdom, but he only wants people who chose to follow him. That way, he knows their faith is true. Hell is decribed a few different ways in the Bible, I would say that mostly it is NOT described as a place where you will burn forever in complete pain and anguish, but more it is described as the absence of God. There are a verse or two that talk about fire, but those who use BIG FLAMING PITS to try to win you to christianity are defeating the point.
The Biblical answer is solid, but it can be tough to swallow. I would HIGHLY recommend reading those two books I mentioned. Like I said, i can sum up the answers for you, but if you really want to investigate this on your own, order them from Amazon or your library. Don't go to a christian bookstore unless you want to get robbed (sorry, personal soapbox there...)
a website that is also good...
-edit-
the good link to a site that uses REAL science to prove the Bible is
www.reasons.org (http://www.reasons.org)
-edit (again)
If you do read these books, I guarantee you will not only be enlightened, but also entertained. They are well written, and provide solid evidence for the Bible, without the catch phrases...
I hope I have helped, but I know you will need more than just my pitiful answer. I could copy the entire book for the bbs if you really want, but you might find it easier to read on your own.
-Greese
[ 08-06-2001: Message edited by: Greese ]
[ 08-06-2001: Message edited by: Greese ]
[ 08-06-2001: Message edited by: Greese ]
-
Kieran-
The truth, as we know it, is all contained in the Bible. The problem is, that it is hard to prove the Bible with the Bible, you know what I mean? God says he blesses those who believe without evidence, but in this world, I completely understand why people just don't take this stuff without proof. There is an awful lot of crap being spewed by people under the guise of christianity.
For starters, a lot of people here have been mentioning their catholic background, and pointing out differences that they see with some of the things we are toaking of here, and what their religion has taught them. Catholicism and christianity (protestantism) are so far apart that I don't see how people can attach doctrines from one into the theology of the other. It would be very easy just to see the small similarities between the two, and assume they believe the same things.
It is sad that in this world there is so much that isn't true masquerading around as christianity, but the Bible tells us this is something we can expect, and even though I would love it if everybody just took the Bible as truth and looked to it for all answers, there are tough questions out there that need real scholars to investigate and answer (not that I am).
I often think of proving the Bible to be alot like the the science behind wind, and the air we breath. Sure, we all know it exists, and we have all seen the scientific proof behind air, wind, etc. I would bet, though, that if you went to just anyone on the street and asked them to scientifically explain the air they are breathing right now, not very many would come up with the correct answer. They just take it for granted that the air is there, they are breathing it, and it blows around. They have heard the evidence at one point, but as the air we breathe is so real to them, why remember the details? As christians, even though we shouldn't have to have evidence for what we believe, which we do as strongly as the air that we breathe, it is good to back up our faith with other things other than the Bible so that if a non-christian comes to us for evidence, we should provide something in terms they can understand. I wish churches would teach apologetics, because I have seen far more evidence than I need to believe, but people don't get the evidence presented to them very well, see my message to MRFISH above. I am horrible at presenting what I know, but I can at least point him in a direction (I hope he goes there) that might provide answers that I can only try to sum up.
-Greese
-
greese said:
"one thing that actually validates it are little inconsistencies"
- what a simple argument - yet, that is the single strongest argument i have heard to date; in or outside of this forum!
it seems to me, however, that this necessitates a lot of interpretation of the bible messages. to me this leads to the question: "who do i then believe when the interpretations are so different?" ie - catholic vs baptist for example or lutheran vs russian orthodox. perhaps the message gets lost via the messenger sometimes?
also:
"Hell is decribed a few different ways in the Bible, I would say that mostly it is NOT described as a place where you will burn forever in complete pain and anguish, but more it is described as the absence of God"
- i also agree with you here. i have even heard it claimed by translators that the word hell was incorrectly translated in a few instances. the actual reference referred to a garbage pit at the edge of town where fires burned night and day because people burned their trash their.
the bums of the day collected there to pick through the trash for food - the inplication being: if you don't follow god you could end up a bum whose shabby and immoral lifestyle has brought you only sorrow. some claim this is the lake of fire translation but i can't validate that because i don't speak hebrew or greek or aramaic and can't directly translate the texts.
however, i still find it difficult to accept a god that designs people to be flawed and then punishes them for not fixing them selves. seems that even the basic design of our planet could have been done with much less potential for anguish.
why make life feed from life for example? why not make us capable of sustaining ourselves from inert matter? why use tools like starvation and disease as population controls? - why not divinely affect birth rates or something equally inobtrusive? isn't that a more compassionate solution?
why design war, torture, rape, pollution and little kids with cancer into your 'greater unseen plan'? i mean, if you're god, was there really no better route to accomplish your aim?
i can only speak from my personal meager human perspective, but if i set out to design a universe i wouldn't even create evil in the 1st place i would simply make it unnecessary. why make flawed people and punish them for your failure? seems like a god should be able to nail that one.
some people claim evil has to be there to act symmetrically so that good exists at all. to me this suggests god is working within a set of predetermined guidelines which then suggests another power greater than god. at any rate if it has to be here we are we trying to defeat it? and if we are trying to defeat then it served no purpose in the first place...circle circle circle :)
your post makes a lot of sense and is refreshingly free of canned christian rhetoric - you paint a biblically consistent picture of god as well imo at least. thanks! <S>
-
Understand how analogies work in the Bible. God is referred to as "Father", and many of the parables are told in the parental context. This was because it was an illustrative manner to convey the feelings of God. Jesus also was referred to as the Shephard, and not surprisingly his audience was largely sheep herders. Look at all the analogies and you can see the common theme.
I've wondered about the lake of fire within the context of analogies, and considered if this was merely the most agonizing picture that could be painted. I don't know.
-
-Quote-it seems to me, however, that this necessitates a lot of interpretation of the bible messages. to me this leads to the question: "who do i then believe when the interpretations are so different?" ie - catholic vs baptist for example or lutheran vs russian orthodox. perhaps the message gets lost via the messenger sometimes?
-Quote-
Well, This is one of those things that many scholars have questioned for a long time. The best thing that can be said is that there are scholars who have done a lot of work on this, and if you want solid answers, read their research. Aside from that, there are things to take into consideration when interpreting the Bible, I find one of the most important is CONTEXT. Who wrote it, who were they writing it to, what was the social situation in the environment that it was written in, etc etc etc. Also, in what style of writing did the author use to convey an idea. Jesus himself used a lot of poetry in his teachings, quite possibly so that it would commit to memory easier (little known fact. Of course, it doesn't translate to english as poetry). One can also investigate by doing word by word studies in the actual language the scripture was written in.
As far as who do you believe when it comes to denominations? Well, I have a simple, but hard to hear answer. That is that you must investigate for yourself what the TRUTH is, then go where you hear the truth taught. It sounds like a big headache, but once you get some basic fundamentals of your faith figured out, finding a good church is easy. Go to a church's webpage, or visit with the pastor. Find out how their beliefs line up with your own investigations. You would be amazed at how many churches are off base for one reason or another. I can't explain it myself. But once you have decided about your core beliefs, it is easier to narrow it down. I myself find that there are good and bad churches in almost every denomination. There are some churches that have split off from the main denomination for some really dumb stuff, but apparently it was important enough to put the church body through a split to prove a point. Prime example is music within the church. People have "interpreted" the Bible to say a lot of different things about music in the church, but what I have found is that it mostly says to use music, in all forms, to the glory of God. Now how that gets interpreted into "Rock and Roll is of the Devil" is something I'll never agree with, but it happens. I know this is a basic example, but this is how I would go about figuring out what is right or wrong. Go to a concordance, which is a book in which you can look up just about any word that is in the Bible. Find out all the veses that mention "Music" and read those verses IN CONTEXT (read the other verses around that scripture that you looked up). Find out what the Bible actually says. If you have further questions, don't give up, find someone who is credible to help you find out.
As far as your other issues, I am going to study that for a while, because I know the "christian" answer to that, but it will be a hard one to swallow.
Read "The Case For Faith"
I cannot recommend that book, or it's predecessor "The Case For Christ" enough.
Read them both for much more entertaining reading and solid answers.
-Greese
-
Quick note on the whole christianity and money issue...
I'm sorry to say that the whole giving to the church has been taken way beyond what it was intended to be. There are a lot of jokers on TBN who will try to tell you that God will bless you if you give your money to the TBN preacher. Give it all up, that way you will never go through any hurt, pain, etc.
That sort of Health and Wealth theology is completely backwards from what the Bible asks of us.
First off, supporting a church is something you should choose to do because you agree with their ministry. It is the only way a church can thrive, is off the contributions of it's members. It can be extremely uncomfortable, though, when it get's to that time in the service where everyone pulls out their money and puts it into the basket. Well, it is the curse of being a christian that no matter what week we choose to bring a visitor, it will be the week they preach on stewardship. AAUUUGGHH. However, one big part of any ministry is asking for money. Unfortunately, a lot of churches turn that into a much bigger issue than it needs to be, and the end result is the image they have created of the poor, poor rich well dressed preacher standing on a stage all in gold, asking for you, who probably just spent your last 10 buck on a pizza, to send it in to them so God can Bless you. What a bunch of crap. We are called to give, but it needs to be a decision that you make to support a ministry, not one that someone is forcing you into with claims of salvation, God's blessings, whatever. Salvation only comes through Jesus, and blessings come because you choose to follow the teachings in the Bible. Blessings come in all kinds of forms also, usually not what we are expecting.
*climbs down off soapbox*
*climbs back on soapbox for a second*
And most christian bookstores are the worst example of christain living and business practices that I have come across.
*stumbles, falls off soapbox*
-Greese
-
Originally posted by mrfish:
thanks greese i appreciate your tenacity!
you should know- i am no stranger to the christian faith.
my mother - a down-home southern church of christ fundamentalist
"will the hypothetical monk go to hell?"
if the answer is "no", then i have a second question:
"where will he go?"
thanks for your help :)
mrfish:
I wasn't going to even get into this thread because I don't really feel qualified to make any kind of statement... BUT when I read your post about your upbringing I felt I had to comment...
I was brought up in a fundementalist family and my upbringing was similar to yours. Although I had it a bit tougher due to the fact that both of my parents were like your mother... I don't know you... But I do know the struggles I went through with both myself and my family and my own mental anguish at trying to figure out where God Really did fit into life...
Unfortunately religion has its extremeists on both ends... The place in any religion or any area of life is to be in balance...
Which is easier said than done...
I don't believe that the hypothetical Monk would go to hell... (even though if I went back to my earliest teachings it would tell me that he would) I used to get in trouble in Sunday School Classes because I would raise the same kind of question... I wasn't being a smart alec I just really wanted to hear why such cases would be dealt with so harshly...
I do believe that the Monk would be rewarded for all of his good works while here on earth... We all do that to some extent... The same as we reap harvests of our own mistakes...
I do NOT believe that Hell is a fire and brimstone torture chamber for lost souls...
I DO believe that EVIL will be destroyed in the lake of fire, along with all that followed evil paths while in this life on earth... Evil of heart...
I DO believe there is a heaven and all persons that believe will be in various levels of Heaven based on their actions while on earth... But more so from the intent in their hearts as opposed to their Works...
You may be able to shed light on this for me ?
I have read and read trying to find out where all the torture and burning in fire for eternity comes from... I do not see it in the Bible when I read it myself... I only have seen the part about that Evil will be cast in the Eternal Lake of Fire...
Fire purifies... Therefore Evil is destroyed on that day... I have read outside of the Bible that the Early Catholic Church installed the torture chamber theory in their books...
Anyway... I figure the Gospel is such a simple thing to live, that Hey, why not just believe in Jesus as the Christ and be safe...
I mean, I don't know of any religions that say I will go to hell for believing in Christ... I have read that many feel that I would be wrong.. But not that I would go to hell for that belief...
Well enuf from me...
Fast Forward to Posts by people more Qualified... :)
BOOT
-
Originally posted by BOOT:
You may be able to shed light on this for me ?
I have read and read trying to find out where all the torture and burning in fire for eternity comes from... I do not see it in the Bible when I read it myself
fair enough question. here are some resources though they are hardly exhaustive:
Matthew 25:41, "Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, PREPARED FOR THE DEVIL AND HIS ANGELS."
Revelation 14:11, "And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night..."
Revelation 20:12, 15, "And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life...And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire."
Matthew 18:8, 9 "Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or feet to be cast into everlasting fire. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire."
Matthew 25:46, "And these shall go away into EVERLASTING punishment: but the righteous into life eternal."
II Thessalonians 1:9 "Who shall be punished with EVERLASTING destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power."
Isaiah 66:24, "And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcasses of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be abhorring unto all flesh."
Mark 9:44 (speaking of hell), "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."
Jude 7, "Sodom and Gomorrha...are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire."
Matthew 22:13, "...Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness;there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
Matthew 13:41-42, "The Son of man (Jesus) shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; and shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth."
Revelation 21:8, "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and potatomongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death."
Psalm 9:17, "The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God."
Isaiah 14:99-11, 15 (referring to Lucifer), "Hell from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee at thy coming: it stirreth up the dead for thee...all they shall speak and say unto thee, Art thou also become
weak as we? art thou become like unto us? Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, and the noise of thy viols: the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee...thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit."
Daniel 12:2, "And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and EVERLASTING contempt."
pretty gruesome eh?
Originally posted by BOOT: "Hey, why not just believe in Jesus as the Christ and be safe..."
lol.....well that's one way to do it. my personal ethos doesn't allow for an insurance belief but i am not especially critical of those who have such beliefs.
i try to be a straight shooter and i think if i were going to be a christian i would have to understand and follow the doctrine as close to the letter as i could. if you're gonna do it - do it! - ya know?
i think many have luke warm beliefs and that isn't healthy spiritually - many pick the parts they like and dismiss the rest -
if that's allowable then i guess i'm already a christian because i can find a great deal of jesus' message that appeals to me. being a true christian means buying into the whole deal imo good bad and indifferent. (that coming from me from course, if you can take advice on being a good christian from a doomed soul :) )
"i'm on a hiiiiiiiiiiiiighwaaaaaayyyyy to heelllllllllll" bon scott, 1979 (r.i.p. bon!)- sorry couldn't resist, best rock album ever made.
-
Originally posted by R4M:
The message of Jesus, as I understand it is very simple:
"Love each other as I've loved you."
I think that this phrase sums it up pretty well. You dont need to believe in a god, a christ, a baptism, to save your soul (Even if you dont believe you have a soul). YOu have to respect and love your brothers, and try to act with good faith. You have to act according to the natural laws we all have since we are born.
No offense RAM, but didn't you just made up your own rules saying they are the "message" of Christ?
How many hours a week do you spend studying the Bible? Do you know what it is about? Saying that you think Jesus is a swell guy and that belief will save you is a big reach my friend. Why don't you just say you don't believe in Jesus? I hope that you change your beliefs RAM, you'd make a fiery preacher. :)
Originally posted by mrfish:i try to be a straight shooter and i think if i were going to be a christian i would have to understand and follow the doctrine as close to the letter as i could. if you're gonna do it - do it! - ya know?
i think many have luke warm beliefs and that isn't healthy spiritually - many pick the parts they like and dismiss the rest -
Amen. mrfish, I have a book I'd like to mail you if you could give me your addy. You are a smart fella, you should join the winning side. :)
-
hehe, Hblair!
Amen. mrfish, I have a book I'd like to mail you if you could give me your addy. You are a smart fella, you should join the winning side. :)
-
Originally posted by hblair:
Amen. mrfish, I have a book I'd like to mail you if you could give me your addy. You are a smart fella, you should join the winning side. :)
hehe thanks hb - sure, as long as it isn't a bible, i have plenty of em. most of them are dogeared, yellow hightlighted and overflowing with notes in the margins and underlined verses from the bootcamp years in sunday school and weds night bible study :) - i used to get in trouble for that but i thought the point was to study it, not look at it!
i'll read anything and at least hear it out. i have some tough problems with christian doctrine and leaving the faith wasn't a snap decision and one i'll likely never retract.
it seemed like the only thing left to do when i could no longer justify my beliefs or ignore nagging conflicts. i don't want anyone to give up their faith but they should at least ask the tough questions - i never challenged my faith enough and was kind of a blind believer. i'll message you with my addy and let me know if it's something i need to mail back - if not, then let me at least help with the postage eh? bammy's along stretch from here!
[ 08-07-2001: Message edited by: mrfish ]
-
Originally posted by hblair:
No offense RAM, but didn't you just made up your own rules saying they are the "message" of Christ?
No offense taken at all hblair. :)
No, I dont think I'm making my own rules out of what He said. His words were those, was the new law, the one He introduced: "Love each other as I've loved you."
I dont know if it is said that way in english, but is the literal translation of the words I know in spanish.
That message was given by Jesus shortly before he died, was his last teach. I think it sums his message well, he always said that we should love God, but being each human a Son of God, loving each one of us, would also be loving God, right?.
At that time atheism was not really an issue. Today is common to find people who think there is no God. To believe is not required, not demanded. All we have to do is to respect our brothers, to love them, because by doing it we are loving God, even if we dont believe in Him.
Is what I think. Is what I believe :). YOu have different points of view, and I will never get as an offense that you disagree with me in that way.
How many hours a week do you spend studying the Bible? Do you know what it is about? Saying that you think Jesus is a swell guy and that belief will save you is a big reach my friend. Why don't you just say you don't believe in Jesus? I hope that you change your beliefs RAM, you'd make a fiery preacher
Hblair until I was 16 I went to a Jesuit School, and the 2 following years I went to another school,also religious (changed of city for 2 years because my father's work demanded it to happen).
Be sure I did study the bible (was a must in the schools I went, so I would've done it anyway), and be sure I did it with an open mind. The bible is a book full of contradictions and of stories wich are, at their best, dubvious.
My conclussions brought me to the point where I stand today: THe bible is NOT a book where to base our beliefs, at least not in a blind way -"if the bible says it, it must be that way"-. It says a lot of truth, but also describes things that I can't simply take seriously. And as I say, contradictions are rampant.
Since I was 18 or so I never opened a bible again. I dont see the sense, as I said is a book written by humans, translated by humans and modified by humans. Its reliability for me as a book of faith is very small, even when it initially could be inspired by god.
Not anymore, IMO.
About Jesus, I believe in him, in that he existed, and in his message. I dont know if the speech of the mountain (is said this way in english?) happened as described in the new testament. If it did happen ,I think that He was THE MAN I would like to know personally, to spend hours asking and learning from him. Even if he was not the Son of God, a man who says such words is a man to admire. And I think he was what he claimed to be.
Maybe I believe in a different jesus than what most christian churches describe. No, not maybe, I DO believe in a Jesus who is VERY different to what we are described by any church I know.
And no I wont make a good preacher, because most preachers seem to know most things about religion, and I am not that sure. I believe, but sometimes I wonder why do I believe. A preacher never has those doubts. At least not that I know :)
[ 08-07-2001: Message edited by: R4M ]
-
Hey Ram I think I see it as you do. I think Jesus was very real indeed and I believe in his *message* also.
Not that it means anything, but I'd be interested to know... Go take that online religion test... it asks ya a boatload of questions then tells you what religion your beliefs are most in-line with.
http://www.speakout.com/ActivismTools/selectors/religion/ (http://www.speakout.com/ActivismTools/selectors/religion/)
God is not my Father. Jesus is my brother.
-
Already did it when that thread started, Nash :) My ten first results are:
#1: Unitarian Universalist (100)
#2: Liberal Quaker (96)
#3: Mainline to Liberal Protestant (86)
#4: Reform Judaism (69)
#5: Mahayana Buddhist (66)
#6: Theravada Buddhist (66)
#7: Orthodox Quaker (66)
#8: New Age (64)
#9: Neo-Pagan (60)
#10: Baháí (60)
I found funny that I was 2.5 times more neo-pagan than catholic ;) :)
-
Thought so...
I came up as Unitarian Universalist aswell. :)
-
this thread could go on for eternity...
Eternity, now there's a concept some do not like to face. How does one that does not believe in anything grasp the idea of eternity?
The finite mind can not comprehend an infinite thought. Sort of like placing two mirrors in front of one another.....
-
We describe it in mathematical terms :).
Or "so bloody long that it's senseless to argue about" :).
Christian minds are just as finite - same problem with appreciating the true nature of infinity :).