Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by tresbien, Feb 19, 2008.
So basically, if you do not accept Christ as your saviour, you should not be molesting children?
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
OK, that was an astoundingly ignorant comment by you. Did you have more to say on the issue?
I made as wide a leap as you did. [still green on the "mock a prophet" free dumb of expression] Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
If going through Christ [brrrrrr] equals his dying for your sins, then clearly one can stretch it to equals you can sin without accountability to victims, as its irrelevant.
So what happens to non-Christians? Any pointers from Jesus? Also, how does a man who cannot save himself save other people?
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
A staggering misconception. I am awed.
"Free dumb". Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Generally I believe the Catholic church assumes "saving grace". Broad interpretation of "through me".
Haw! There's an old one. "Let us see your Jesus save you now, hah?" Lovely. A counter-question: if Allah is such a hairily fickle beast, why should I follow him? After all, if he so chooseth, he could save me, but if he's already made up his mind, why bother with him?
The very question put to Jesus by the Roman thug soldiers, who also found Jesus's take on "hero" and "king" completely incomprehensible.
You're in bad company, in the New Testament Christian account of things. I sort of thought Islam prided itself in incorporating Jesus' teachings as prophetic wisdom ?
As in Jesus's time there were no Christians as yet, yes, a few. There's a passage in the Bible about those who do not make much of worship or piety but care for the sick and help the poor etc, and are informed "As you did unto the least of these, so you did also unto me" on judgment day (takes care of the "through me" part, in some interpretations). And other quotes similar. But all this varies among various Christians, in how it informs belief.
So is it necessary to go through Christ for salvation? Or not?
According to whom ?
I think I already commented on that one.
According to Jesus of course.
When he said "no one comes to God except through me", was there a loophole for non-Christians?
And if no one comes to God except through Jesus, how does he differentiate between the child molesting priest and the devout but righteous Hindu? Who goes to hell?
Well, Sam...Here is what I was taught as a child, raised as a Southern Baptist:
God hates sin...it's dark and ugly...and cannot stand it to be in his presence. Since Adam and Eve sinned, we are covered in this dark ugliness called sin. For us to be in the presence of God, we have to wash the sin away...and apparently the only way to do that is with blood. Before Christ, back in old testament days, people would have to come to the temple and sacrifice an animal to spill it's blood to clean away their sins.
So God sent his only son to be the ultimate, once and for all sacrifice..his blood cleans everybody's sins. Only deal..you have to ask for this cleansing for some reason, and be saved. If you don't, you can't be in God's presence and go to Heaven. You get sent to suffer for eternity in hell.
I'm not sure if the system is backwards compatible...I don't think you get credit for sacrificing animals anymore..I believe that went out with the change from Salvation 1.0 to 2.0.
As I and Geoff and now Mac have pointed out, repeatedly now, there are various ways to interpret what Jesus said. I quoted one of the passages sometimes taken as saving the good everywhere, regardless of Christian piety. Sometimes not. So "according to Jesus" only gets you so far.
There are, for example, Christians who interpret what Jesus said as indicating the accumulation of worldly wealth is a sign of God's favor. That's about as far from the Christianity I was raised with as one can get. But there it is.
So, again: according to whom ?
As a schoolkid I was taught that Jesus said: " No man cometh unto the Father ( God)except through me. This was taken to mean that one should follow the teachings of Jesus.
A major differtence between Roman Catholicism and Protestanism is that Catholics believe (good) works are necessary to be saved, Protestants seem to believe that having faith ( belief and trust) in Jesus is enough.
How do they know God sent his only son? How do they know he is a son? And an only? What is the basis of washing sins with blood? And eating the flesh of Christ and drinking his blood?
Ah I see, that explains why I find USAmerican Christians so strange. They are all Protestants?
Because we haven't turned up any others so far. I'll keep you posted, but if we're right and another one shows up, you'll probably notice fairly early on.
...er, because Jesus is a male name? :shrug:
Christian theology believes Jesus shed his blood to save us from sin.
It's a Last Supper reference. Just essentially defines Christians as accepting Jesus, although some elaborative over-thinkers started a whole transubstantiation idea which is a little silly in a way. It's really just a metaphor.
Or we're horrible, horrible cannibals.
Sam, have you actually been to the US?
That is just bread and wine. It is hard to say but definitely not all Protestant. There are so many different types but new ones that develop seem to be watched pretty closely. Sometimes people form their own groups, sometimes these are small and the leader believes he is actually Jesus. But these cases are rare.
They are no more strange than other religions but that depends on how you look at it and how you judge them.
The stargest but coolest ceremony i have ever seen were the Hindu ceremonies. I have been to a fair amount of those. The first time was shocking but in a good way. I have only been towedding ceremonies of friends but this is what happens:
You have the main guy (forgot what they call him) come in and then he blesses the walls. And there are drummers with their drums around their necks and people dancing. The priest or efficient also burns stuff in bowls, sometimes he burn popcorn.
Also you have to take you shoes off. Then the groom arrives in either an expensive car or on a horse. Of course he is dressed (as everyone else is) in traditional garb. Then the Bride comes in, she is usually already there but hidden away. They meet for the first time right were the actual ceremony takes place and they all sit down (on the ground) and proceed from there. The whole ceremony takes about four hours.
After that there is food and many of the older people eat with their hands. It was pretty wild, especially the first time you see it.
Then you have the Jewish practitioners. Been to quite a few BarMitvahs\Batmitvahs weddings etc. My ex girlfriend was Jewish, although she was actually adopted. Through that affiliation i had access to the inner sanctum of Judaism. The Jews really liked me too. Anhd honestly they all did, from all faiths and backgrounds. I just smiled a lot and looked real good in a suit.
I have partied with them all. From Persians to new age psychedelic events. That is how i know so much.
I will update this soon. Perhaps i can go into more detail but i think you have to be there. Also forgot to mention the African American Churches i been to had full bands and singing, dancing.
Separate names with a comma.