Q for Followers of Jesus

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by KarlMarx
No, I am not being selective. Saying that Hitler was a Christian is like saying that the Pope is Jewish. It also is an insult to those Christians e.g. Mother Teresa and others like her who dedicated their lives helping the poor and sick in the name of Christ.

Hitler and the Nazis wanted to demolish Christianity under the Reich and replace it with paganism (in which, of course, Hitler would undoubtedly be considered divine). Hitler and the Nazis imprisoned and murdered thousands of priests, nuns and Christians. Churches were shut down under the Reich if they did not tow the party line. Heinrich Himler (the head of the SS) and many of the Nazi elite were deeply involved in the occult. In fact, many SS ceremonies were taken from ancient pagan rites. The swastika is a symbol taken from the occult, too.

Atheists were never in power until the 20th century. But under Stalin and Lenin, thousands of churches were shut down, many more priests and nuns murdered, people were thrown into prison for practicing their faith (much like what is happening in Communist China and North Korea today!).

The real problem is that when Man gets the idea that he is divine and is not accountable to a higher power (whether it be the Law or to God), he's capable of committing the most heinous atrocities, regardless of whether it is in the name of Christ, God, or Communism. The root of evil is not religion, the root is human nature and arrogance.

P.S. If I were to compare the number of people murdered by atheistic communists to those killed in the name of God since 09/11, I'll wager I'd still win the argument. You seem to conveniently ignore the fact that Communist China, Cuba and North Korea are all atheistic regimes and have millions of people imprisoned and are torturing and murdering many of them. The fact that you don't hear about the atrocities committed by these three countries doesn't mean they aren't happening. Of course, thanks to our media which has a decidedly Left wing slant, you probably won't!

Amen Brother. Ive never bought the argument that more people have been killed in the Name of God than for any other reason. its BS. Far more people have been killed in the name of the state. How many people have died in wars in the 20th century? we are talking about millions if not hundreds of millions of people there. Are people really trying to argue that more people were killed in the name of God in the 19 centuries before? please. We didnt have the population explosion till the 19th century so there werent that many people around to be killed in the name of God. So how the heck is the argument valid?

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by KarlMarx

No, I am not being selective. Saying that Hitler was a Christian is like saying that the Pope is Jewish. It also is an insult to those Christians e.g. Mother Teresa and others like her who dedicated their lives helping the poor and sick in the name of Christ.

Hitler and the Nazis wanted to demolish Christianity under the Reich and replace it with paganism (in which, of course, Hitler would undoubtedly be considered divine). Hitler and the Nazis imprisoned and murdered thousands of priests, nuns and Christians.......

Sorry again but:

In his book *The Holy Reich* Richard Steigmann-Gall argues persuasively that the Nazis did not reject Christianity, but reinterpreted it to fit their own ideology. Contrary to conventional wisdom, most Nazi leaders, including Hitler, were not keen on reviving paganism. Rather, they talked about something which at first glance seemed very appealing - "positive Christianity." Also referred to as "active" or "practical" Christianity, it emphasized deeds over doctrine. The Nazis contrasted "positive Christianity" with "negative Christianity." The former evoked good feelings - and was quite adaptable. The latter, with its doctrines such as original sin, made people feel bad and did not adapt so easily. The Nazis particularly despised the dogma, ritual and internationalism of the Catholic Church. Those things they saw as evidence it had been "corrupted by Jews." In the early years of his regime, Hitler worked hard to establish a Protestant *Reich Church* (modeled after the Church of England) but eventually dropped the project because of resistance from Evangelicals who valued doctrine. The "positive Christianity" of the Nazis gave them no firm ground for approaching Jesus. They actually went so far as to deny that Jesus was a Jew and to cast him as the model anti-Semite.As a Catholic priest, the book gave me a lot to think about. Even though we live in a society very different from Germany of the 1930's, still we face some similar challenges, particularly regarding the worth of each human life. And we see similar efforts to recast Jesus without consideration of early Christian creeds.

See a review of Richard Stegimann-Gall's book at http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.cgi?path=55161057430311

In Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945" the author, Richard Steigmann-Gall, shows that the Nazi face of Christianity grew out of 19th Century Protestant liberalism's efforts to accomodate the growing modernism and secularism of Western Europe. But, more importantly it clearly shows that time and again it was the Catholic Church, whether it was the Vatican or on the Diocesan level, that consistantly stood in opposition to Naziism's anti-life programs like the T4 program (the purposeful killing of the mentally ill) and the eradication of Jews, Gypsies, and others. The same cannot be said for most of the Protestant churches in Germany. This is not to say that there were no Catholics involved in even the darkest deeds of National Socialism, but Richard Steigmann-Gall shows that many of the Catholics who embraced Naziism either abandoned their Catholic faith, became quasi-pagans, or converted to Protestantism.Finally, a fair treatment of this dark period of history and the relationship of the Nazi regime and Christianity. We get to see how form Naziism's inception to its demise that the some churches and the regime went from embracing each other to almost outright hatred. Many surprises in this book that will shatter your preconceived notions about Christianity, Paganism, and Atheism in Nazi Germany. This is a must read for all Roman Catholics who need a good academic response to the calumny of writers like John Cornwell, James Carroll, or Garry Wills. This book should be in every Roman Catholic apologists library.
Prof. Steigmann-Gall presents a convincing argument for the influence of Christianity on Nazism and anti-Semitism; contradicting the prevailing view that Nazism was an atheistic movement. I found this book to be well thought out and intriguing.

P.S. If I were to compare the number of people murdered by atheistic communists to those killed in the name of God since 09/11, I'll wager I'd still win the argument. You seem to conveniently ignore the fact that Communist China, Cuba and North Korea are all atheistic regimes and have millions of people imprisoned and are torturing and murdering many of them. The fact that you don't hear about the atrocities committed by these three countries doesn't mean they aren't happening. Of course, thanks to our media which has a decidedly Left wing slant, you probably won't!

Wagering or speculating about Christians being murdered, imprisioned or tortured by Communists or atheists or both is not a valid method for determing anything.

The history of mankind (not the last hundred years) documents the reality of killing in the name of god and the sporadic killing for non-religious reasons is pretty clear. The majority of the population of the world have some form of religion and a god as a result of murdering for conversion. Atheism and Communism account for only a very small portion of murdering for nothing more than conquest.

http://ruthlessreviews.com/rants/ocp.html

 

[musicman]

Originally posted by ajwps
Sorry again but:
In his book *The Holy Reich* Richard Steigmann-Gall argues persuasively that the Nazis did not reject Christianity, but reinterpreted it to fit their own ideology.

Sorrier still, but once you start reinterpreting Christianity to fit your own ideology, you have ceased to practice Christianity.

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by Avatar4321

Its rather sad to see how Christians who dont understand all of the plan of salvation can condemn men so easily.

Avatar could you kindly explain the 'Christian plan of salvation' which condemns non-believers (non-Christian infidels) to Haides while those who accept the shed blood of Jesus are the only ones given salvation?

Is the following gospel verse the Christian 'plan of salvation' for the mass murderers and condemnation for the innocents murdered by those saved Christians in the shed blood of Jesus?

Ephesians 2

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God (Jesus):

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by musicman

Sorrier still, but once you start reinterpreting Christianity to fit your own ideology, you have ceased to practice Christianity.

How many Christian denominations have reinterpreted Christianity over the centuries?

Answer: Every single Christian denomination has revised, re-interpreted and found Christ to be one god, triune godhead, three separate gods and many more.

The latest is the Mel Gibson Version of the New Testament. He is quoted as saying that he portrayed the real and unabridged passion of Jesus during his last hours.

Just one thing, during the time of Jesus there were Arabs also living in the land of the Jewish people but I could find not even one in the Mel Gibson Version.

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by Avatar4321

Amen Brother. Ive never bought the argument that more people have been killed in the Name of God than for any other reason. its BS. Far more people have been killed in the name of the state. How many people have died in wars in the 20th century? we are talking about millions if not hundreds of millions of people there. Are people really trying to argue that more people were killed in the name of God in the 19 centuries before? please. We didnt have the population explosion till the 19th century so there werent that many people around to be killed in the name of God. So how the heck is the argument valid?

Avatar now you have heard the arument from Christians themselves.

Please give verifiable statistics to back your position that hundreds of millions have been killed for anything other than their god. Please don't conjecture on your own wishes.

Thank you....

 

[Modu$OperanDi]

I have a question for Christians:

Assuming you have any common sense in you, and you understand the level of vastness of not only life, but intelligent life existing in this universe, what would you say for the trillions of other species resembling our own in present times and over the last 12 billion years.

Have they all really been blessed with a single divine individual who brought forth the word of the almighty creator?

If you cannot answer this question with a simple 'yes', then what? Has god declared them unworthy of 'being saved'? Have you ever even THOUGHT about how Christianity works on a Universal level?

Does this concept truly 'fit' with what is natural, pure, and divine?

Christianity was created in a time when mankind is all mankind was aware of. Long, long before the age of 'the round Earth'; which is precisely why Christianity takes no regard for the knowledge of our surroundings (which by the way IS 'god's kingdom'), and places the human and the human's god at essentially the center of all that is relevant.

Science is religion done the right way, with immeasurable routes for spiritual exploration and fascination. The unrelenting faith in Christianity serves only as a personal coping mechanism and a barrier to the advancement of higher thinking. It is plain and simply: wrong.

 

[musicman]

Originally posted by ajwps:

"How many Christian denominations have reinterpreted Christianity over the centuries........"



Denominations are the creations of fallible men. Don't try to hold Christians to some special stndard of perfection - it ain't gonna happen. However, if a denomination earnestly tries to stick close to the word of God, it won't go far wrong. Let's face it, man - Nazism is a pretty f***ing dramatic reinterpretation of Christianity!

I haven't seen "The Passion" yet, but if you'd really like to learn more about the Bible, there are better sources than the movies.

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by musicman

Denominations are the creations of fallible men. Don't try to hold Christians to some special stndard of perfection - it ain't gonna happen. However, if a denomination earnestly tries to stick close to the word of God, it won't go far wrong. Let's face it, man - Nazism is a pretty f***ing dramatic reinterpretation of Christianity! I haven't seen "The Passion" yet, but if you'd really like to learn more about the Bible, there are better sources than the movies.

Okay I give up. Which Christian denomination earnestly attempts to stick close to the word of Jesus?

Anwer: The Ebionites or the first Church of Jesus Christ, his brother John and John the Baptist.

Comments on the Ebionites
When Jesus came, many Jews wondered if he was the reincarnation of one of the prophets. Some wondered the same thing about John the Baptist. Jesus affirmed to His disciples that John the Baptist was the reincarnation of Elijah the Prophet.

The beginning of Christianity stands two figures: Jesus and Paul. Jesus is regarded by Christians as the founder of their religion, in that the events of his life comprise the foundation story of Christianity; but Paul is regarded as the great interpreter of Jesus' mission, who explained, in a way that Jesus himself never did, how Jesus' life and death fitted into a cosmic scheme of salvation, stretching from the creation of Adam to the end of time. The doctrines of Christianity come mostly from the teaching of Paul, who claimed to be a Pharisee who rejected his Judaism and converted to his vision of Christ, thereby writing or influencing most the books chosen for the New Testament. There was in fact three main early churches, those of Paul, those of the Gnostics, and the Jewish-Christians sometimes called Ebionites. (Meaning "poor men?")

Jesus' actual apostles in the gospels are often portrayed as doubters and even stupid, never quite understanding what Jesus is saying. Their importance in the origins of Christianity, are at best marginalized. For example, we find immediately after Jesus' death that the leader of the Jerusalem Church is Jesus' brother James. (Acts) In the Gospels this James has almost nothing to do with Jesus' mission only given a brief mention as one of the brothers of Jesus, who allegedly opposed Jesus during his lifetime and regarded him as a nutcase. But Acts (supposed to be a historical narrative written by Luke) tells us after Jesus' death James, a brother who had been hostile to Jesus in his lifetime, suddenly became the revered leader of His Church. Like so much else, this isn't explained. Let us remember that according to scholars all the gospels were written after Paul's writings, there are no originals.

In fact James is a subject, some Protestants in particular, wish would just go away. The most likely explanation is that the near erasure of Jesus' brother James (and his other brothers) from any significant role in the gospel story is part of the downplaying of the early leaders who had been in close contact with Jesus whom regarded with great suspicion and dismay the Christological theories of Paul. Paul flaunted his brand new visions in interpretation of the Jesus whom he had never met in the flesh. The church fathers wanted the Jesus of Paul, a neoplatonic savior-god that offered salvation at no effort other than faith and through the church. They didn't want the Jesus of James, a Jew that wouldn't let them escape the Law, which held one directly responsible for their actions. James and the other apostles were in fact bitter enemies of Paul.

Jesus and his immediate followers were Pharisees who like the Zoroastrians (Persians) believed in the resurrection of the dead. (The Sadducees rejected this and were at odds with the Pharisees.) Jesus was a rabbi who probably had no intention of founding a new religion. He regarded himself as the Messiah in the normal Jewish sense of the term, i.e. a human leader who would restore the Jewish monarchy and inaugurate an era of peace, justice and prosperity (known as "the kingdom of God") for the whole world. Jesus believed himself to be the figure prophesied in the Hebrew Bible who would do all these things. He was not a militarist and did not build up an army to fight the Romans, since he believed that God would perform a great miracle to break the power of Rome. This miracle would take place on the Mount of Olives, as prophesied in the book of Zechariah. Note that Pharisee Judaism is the one that survives today.

The first followers of Jesus, under James and Peter, founded the Jerusalem Church after Jesus' death. They were called the Nazarenes, and in all their beliefs they were indistinguishable from the Pharisees, except that they believed in the resurrection of Jesus, and that Jesus was still the promised Messiah. They believed Jesus had been brought back to life after his death on the cross, and would soon come back to complete his mission of overthrowing the Romans and setting up the Messianic kingdom. The Nazarenes did not believe that Jesus had abrogated the Jewish religion, or Torah. Having known Jesus personally, they were aware that he had observed the Jewish religious law all his life and had never rebelled against it. His Sabbath cures were not against Pharisee law. The Nazarenes were themselves very observant of Jewish religious law. They practiced circumcision, did not eat the forbidden foods and showed great respect to the Temple.

The Nazarenes did not regard themselves as belonging to a new religion; their religion was Judaism. They set up synagogues of their own, but they also attended non-Nazarene synagogues on occasion, and performed the same kind of worship in their own synagogues as was practiced by all observant Jews. The Nazarenes became suspicious of Paul when they heard that he was preaching that Jesus was the founder of a new religion and that he had abrogated the Torah. After an attempt to reach an understanding with Paul, the Nazarenes (i.e. the Jerusalem Church under James and Peter) broke irrevocably with Paul and disowned him. Indeed, when Paul visited Jerusalem, Jews attacked and try to kill him. Paul is saved only by invoking his Roman citizenship, a citizenship that Jews fiercely hated in those days. Because Paul appeals to Rome, Paul is then taken to there where he undergoes a trial for his life.

Paul, not Jesus, was the founder of Christianity as a new religion which developed away from both normal Judaism and the Nazarene variety of Judaism. In this new religion, central myth was that of an atoning death of a Divine being. Belief in this sacrifice, and a mystical sharing of the death of the deity, formed the only path to salvation. Paul alone was the creator of this amalgam.

A source of information about Paul that has never been taken seriously enough is a group called the Ebionites. Their writings were suppressed by the Orthodox Church, but some of their views and traditions were preserved in the writings of their opponents, particularly in the huge "Treatise on Heresies" by Epiphanius. From this it appears that the Ebionites had a very different account to give of Paul's background and early life from that found in the New Testament and fostered by Paul himself. The Ebionites testified that Paul had no Pharisaic background or training; he was the son of Gentiles, converted to Judaism in Tarsus, came to Jerusalem when an adult, and attached himself to the High Priest as a henchman. Disappointed in his hopes of advancement, he broke with the High Priest and sought fame by founding a new religion. These accounts, while not reliable in all its details may be substantially correct. It makes far more sense of all the puzzling and contradictory features of the story of Paul than the account of the official documents of the Orthodox Church.

The Ebionites were stigmatized by the Orthodox Church as heretics who failed to understand that Jesus was a Divine person and asserted instead that he was a human being who came to inaugurate a new earthly age, as prophesied by the Jewish prophets of the Bible. Moreover, the Ebionites refused to accept the Orthodox Church doctrine derived from Paul, that Jesus abolished or abrogated the Jewish law. Instead, the Ebionites observed the law and regarded themselves as Jews. The Ebionites were not heretics, as the Church asserted, nor "re-Judaizers," as modern scholars call them, but the authentic successors of the immediate disciples and followers of Jesus, whose views and doctrines they faithfully transmitted, believing correctly that they were derived from Jesus himself. They were the same group that had earlier been called the Nazarenes, who were led by James and Peter, who had known Jesus during his lifetime, and were in a far better position to know his aims than Paul, who met Jesus only in dreams and visions. Thus the opinion held by the Ebionites about Paul is of extraordinary interest and deserves respectful consideration, instead of dismissal as 'scurrilous' propaganda -- the reaction of Christian scholars from ancient to modern times.

The Ebionites and the existence of the Jewish Church itself still haunt the churches of Paul (Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox) to this day. The Ebionites and others were declared heretics only on the basis of the "say-so" of the church and its self-chosen counsels. God decides, not the churches.

 

[KarlMarx]

Originally posted by ajwps
Sorry again but:

In his book *The Holy Reich* Richard Steigmann-Gall argues persuasively that the Nazis did not reject Christianity, but reinterpreted it to fit their own ideology. Contrary to conventional wisdom, most Nazi leaders, including Hitler, were not keen on reviving paganism. Rather, they talked about something which at first glance seemed very appealing - "positive Christianity." Also referred to as "active" or "practical" Christianity, it emphasized deeds over doctrine. The Nazis contrasted "positive Christianity" with "negative Christianity." The former evoked good feelings - and was quite adaptable. The latter, with its doctrines such as original sin, made people feel bad and did not adapt so easily. The Nazis particularly despised the dogma, ritual and internationalism of the Catholic Church. Those things they saw as evidence it had been "corrupted by Jews." In the early years of his regime, Hitler worked hard to establish a Protestant *Reich Church* (modeled after the Church of England) but eventually dropped the project because of resistance from Evangelicals who valued doctrine. The "positive Christianity" of the Nazis gave them no firm ground for approaching Jesus. They actually went so far as to deny that Jesus was a Jew and to cast him as the model anti-Semite.As a Catholic priest, the book gave me a lot to think about. Even though we live in a society very different from Germany of the 1930's, still we face some similar challenges, particularly regarding the worth of each human life. And we see similar efforts to recast Jesus without consideration of early Christian creeds.

See a review of Richard Stegimann-Gall's book at http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.cgi?path=55161057430311



P.S. If I were to compare the number of people murdered by atheistic communists to those killed in the name of God since 09/11, I'll wager I'd still win the argument. You seem to conveniently ignore the fact that Communist China, Cuba and North Korea are all atheistic regimes and have millions of people imprisoned and are torturing and murdering many of them. The fact that you don't hear about the atrocities committed by these three countries doesn't mean they aren't happening. Of course, thanks to our media which has a decidedly Left wing slant, you probably won't!

Wagering or speculating about Christians being murdered, imprisioned or tortured by Communists or atheists or both is not a valid method for determing anything.

The history of mankind (not the last hundred years) documents the reality of killing in the name of god and the sporadic killing for non-religious reasons is pretty clear. The majority of the population of the world have some form of religion and a god as a result of murdering for conversion. Atheism and Communism account for only a very small portion of murdering for nothing more than conquest.

http://ruthlessreviews.com/rants/ocp.html

The website you gave as a reference has a decidedly anti-Christian slant, so I doubt the objectivity of your source.
Evidence of the systematic persecution of Christian Churches was presented during the Nuremburg trials

http://camlaw.rutgers.edu/publications/law-religion/nurinst1.htm

To back up my claim that atheists are killing people in mass quantities


http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2002/18327.htm

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3071466/

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by KarlMarx

The website you gave as a reference has a decidedly anti-Christian slant, so I doubt the objectivity of your source.
Evidence of the systematic persecution of Christian Churches was presented during the Nuremburg trials

http://camlaw.rutgers.edu/publications/law-religion/nurinst1.htm

I see..... You are saying that any Christian publications or books that disagrees with you and you ideations are anti-Christian.

Thats nice......

To back up my claim that atheists are killing people in mass quantities

I have read (painfully) each of your web site proofs. I can find no evidence of large mass scale murder of Christians in any of your sites. Yes there is torture and imprisonment by these governments and sources, but almost no murders of Christians. Just killing people of different faiths and races that are considered enemies of the state.

You'll just have to try a little bit harder next time.

 

[KarlMarx]

Originally posted by ajwps
The website you gave as a reference has a decidedly anti-Christian slant, so I doubt the objectivity of your source.
Evidence of the systematic persecution of Christian Churches was presented during the Nuremburg trials

http://camlaw.rutgers.edu/publications/law-religion/nurinst1.htm

I see..... You are saying that any Christian publications or books that disagrees with you and you ideations are anti-Christian.

Thats nice......

To back up my claim that atheists are killing people in mass quantities

I have read (painfully) each of your web site proofs. I can find no evidence of large mass scale murder of Christians in any of your sites. Yes there is torture and imprisonment by these governments and sources, but almost no murders of Christians. Just killing people of different faiths and races that are considered enemies of the state.

You'll just have to try a little bit harder next time.

No, I do not think that website that any "Christian publications or books that disagrees with me are anti-Christian" (where did you come up with that?). But the website that you pulled your reference from has lines like

ONWARD CHRISTIAN PSYCHOS!

That seems to me as being somewhat slanted.


I never did say that Christians are being killed in these camps. I was merely responding to your original claim that if one were to compare the number of people killed by atheists to those killed for religious reasons since 9/11 that the religious killings would be greater by a factor of 10 (by the way, where did you get that information?). I am refuting that, claiminng that the atheists would still be ahead, although I haven't found hard numbers, the existence of prison camps in North Korea, China and Cuba (all being atheistic regimes) makes a strong case for my claim.

My original argument was that perhaps more people have died because of religious wars, but has killed more people in its one century of being in power than religion has.

You seem to have a habit of twisting, extrapolating and misinterpreting what I post.

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by ajwps
Avatar could you kindly explain the 'Christian plan of salvation' which condemns non-believers (non-Christian infidels) to Haides while those who accept the shed blood of Jesus are the only ones given salvation?

Is the following gospel verse the Christian 'plan of salvation' for the mass murderers and condemnation for the innocents murdered by those saved Christians in the shed blood of Jesus?

Not sure where to begin with. First, you know what Hades is dont you? Its the Realm of the dead. Christ has redeemed all mankind from Hades, both the just and the unjust. the men made righteous through the blood of Christ will rise in the resurrection of the just and those who continued in their sins rise in the resurrection of the unjust. Thus despite that through one man all men die, through Christ all will rise again.

Second, you seem to be under the impression that we arent all imperfect people. We are imperfect though. we all make our mistakes. And our mistakes has cost the world the best blood that has ever walked in the Flesh.

Because we all sin, we are all subject to the law and justice will cry out for all of us unless we repent of our sins and turn to Christ. Then will the blood of Christ be able to atone for our sins, because Christ has paid the demands of Justice.

Contrary what many Christians seem to think. Repentance is more than simply saying you repent of your sins. There is work involved. work and sacrifice. The Sacrifice we offer is a broken heart and a contrite Spirit. Not only that, Repentance also involves restitution of what was taken. Which is why its most difficult for men to repent of murder and sexual immorality. Because its impossible for men to restore this by their own power. I think if a mass murder truly repented, the Lord may be merciful to Him. I dont know, its not my place to judge, But simply doing a "death bed repentance" really isnt possible. It takes time to Repent. And I would hope that we would all pursue repentance before death rather than before the resurrection because it will be alot easier at this stage of life then the following.

As for the victims of the mass murder. They are under the same law as everyone else. If they repent of their sins through the Atonement of Christ, then they will be saved. But if they will not repent of their sins they will suffer the just punishment for their sins. Just because some evil men like hitler will kill many people who didnt deserve it, that doesnt mean those people are not accountable for their own actions while they lived. They have their chances just like the rest of us. God is just to every man and merciful to those who obtain it. But anyone who understands the plan realizes that mercy is impossible without accepting the payment made by the Savior. Someone has to take the responsibility. Mercy cannot rob justice. And those who continue to sin despite the message of repentance and forgiveness, those who willfully continue in their sins cannot be saved, because God came to save man from their sins, not in their sins.

 

[Joz]

Guess I've come to the party rather late.....sorry.

To: AJWPS

Please tell me where you get your info & stats on the Ebionites, the reincarnation of Elijah, Paul being the basis of church doctrines, the Pharisees being Christ's followers.

 

[Avatar4321]

Originally posted by Modu$OperanDi
I have a question for Christians:

Assuming you have any common sense in you, and you understand the level of vastness of not only life, but intelligent life existing in this universe, what would you say for the trillions of other species resembling our own in present times and over the last 12 billion years.

Have they all really been blessed with a single divine individual who brought forth the word of the almighty creator?

If you cannot answer this question with a simple 'yes', then what? Has god declared them unworthy of 'being saved'? Have you ever even THOUGHT about how Christianity works on a Universal level?

Does this concept truly 'fit' with what is natural, pure, and divine?

Christianity was created in a time when mankind is all mankind was aware of. Long, long before the age of 'the round Earth'; which is precisely why Christianity takes no regard for the knowledge of our surroundings (which by the way IS 'god's kingdom'), and places the human and the human's god at essentially the center of all that is relevant.

Science is religion done the right way, with immeasurable routes for spiritual exploration and fascination. The unrelenting faith in Christianity serves only as a personal coping mechanism and a barrier to the advancement of higher thinking. It is plain and simply: wrong.

You realize you are poisoning the well dont you? Do you really want to find answers or are you just trying to find an excuse to attack Christians and call them stupid.

Science can never be religion or replace spirituality. Science simply answers what and how things that are physically measurable happen. God explains why things happen and the whats and the wheres to what cannot be measured. Why are where here? where do we come from? Where are we going? What is the meaning of life? what is good? how do we achieve happiness in this life and the life to come. If a man die, will he rise again? Certainly science can be used to give support of spiritual things through physical evidence. But it will never be able to replace faith and spirituality. Science is based solely on what is measurable. It can explain that, but to close ones mind off to that which is immeasurable. To exalt science over its place, to learn things about the physical world around us, and to replace it as a religion closes our minds and hearts to things that science cannot explain and never explain. by focusing on our mental abilities and ignoring the Spiritual side of life, we lose a major part of what life has to offer and lose true happiness.

But if youd like to learn about God for yourself, i recommend an experiment on the word. God has said "Seek and ye shall find, ask and it shall be given, knock and it shall be opened unto you" Find in yourself the desire to learn the truth. then study the scriptures pray, experiment on the teaching you find in the scriptures by living them, seek for God and ask Him with a sincere heart and you will find Him. I know because I have found him myself using that same method. Just remember that with knowledge comes great responsibility, When we know the truth we are even more accountable if we fail to live by it. God lives. He will reveal Himself to those who seek Him. I know this for myself.

 

[Avatar4321]

When Jesus came, many Jews wondered if he was the reincarnation of one of the prophets. Some wondered the same thing about John the Baptist. Jesus affirmed to His disciples that John the Baptist was the reincarnation of Elijah the Prophet.

My only problem here with this is that, Elijah never died so how can he be reincarnated?

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by Avatar4321

Not sure where to begin with. First, you know what Hades is dont you? Its the Realm of the dead.

Interesting.... Hades (Hell) is the realm of the dead? Where does this concept derive?

Christ has redeemed all mankind from Hades, both the just and the unjust. the men made righteous through the blood of Christ will rise in the resurrection of the just and those who continued in their sins rise in the resurrection of the unjust. Thus despite that through one man all men die, through Christ all will rise again.

Astounding.... So through Christ's death all the believers (just and unjust) will rise in the resurrection of the just as well as those believers who cotinue in their sins? Did you really mean to say that through the death of one man (Christ) ALL MANKIND will rise again including those who never accepted Jesus Christ as their personal savior? My minister friend who is reading this statement is still rolling on the floor laughing.

Second, you seem to be under the impression that we arent all imperfect people. We are imperfect though. we all make our mistakes. And our mistakes has cost the world the best blood that has ever walked in the Flesh.

Do you mean that if the Father had made mankind without sin, the best blood (Jesus shed blood) would not have been spilled on the cross? And Jesus would never have had to commit suicide by coming to the earth only to be crucified for prime (original) sin? That was nice of Christ especially when he cried to his father on the cross, "My G-d my G-d, why have you forsaken me?" (Mathew 27:46, Mark 15:34). You must conclude that at that last critical moment, he did not wish to die and become a willing sacrifice for the sins of mankind. Especially if he was really the flesh representation of himself.

Because we all sin, we are all subject to the law and justice will cry out for all of us unless we repent of our sins and turn to Christ. Then will the blood of Christ be able to atone for our sins, because Christ has paid the demands of Justice.

Unfortunately Christ was sent to give you salvation as works are dead according to St. Paul.

Contrary what many Christians seem to think. Repentance is more than simply saying you repent of your sins. There is work involved. work and sacrifice. The Sacrifice we offer is a broken heart and a contrite Spirit. Not only that, Repentance also involves restitution of what was taken. Which is why its most difficult for men to repent of murder and sexual immorality. Because its impossible for men to restore this by their own power. I think if a mass murder truly repented, the Lord may be merciful to Him. I dont know, its not my place to judge, But simply doing a "death bed repentance" really isnt possible. It takes time to Repent. And I would hope that we would all pursue repentance before death rather than before the resurrection because it will be alot easier at this stage of life then the following.

Wait a minute here.

What are you talking about? You are talking about repentence and restitution to those we have offended.

Galatians 2:16

Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

As for the victims of the mass murder. They are under the same law as everyone else. If they repent of their sins through the Atonement of Christ, then they will be saved. But if they will not repent of their sins they will suffer the just punishment for their sins. Just because some evil men like hitler will kill many people who didnt deserve it, that doesnt mean those people are not accountable for their own actions while they lived. They have their chances just like the rest of us. God is just to every man and merciful to those who obtain it. But anyone who understands the plan realizes that mercy is impossible without accepting the payment made by the Savior. Someone has to take the responsibility. Mercy cannot rob justice. And those who continue to sin despite the message of repentance and forgiveness, those who willfully continue in their sins cannot be saved, because God came to save man from their sins, not in their sins.

So you admit that the innocent victims (men, women and children) of the Nazi Christians are not justified by accepting Jesus while the murderers live with Jesus in his mansions in the sky. The babies who were killed had no way of accepting Jesus's shed blood and they too burn in hell. How close is your Christianity to Islam in this respect?

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by Avatar4321

My only problem here with this is that, Elijah never died so how can he be reincarnated?

Hey that is not my concept. It was the earliest Christian Church Ebionites who claimed Elijah was reincarnated with John the Baptist.

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by Joz
Guess I've come to the party rather late.....sorry. To: AJWPS

Please tell me where you get your info & stats on the Ebionites, the reincarnation of Elijah, Paul being the basis of church doctrines, the Pharisees being Christ's followers.

Remember that the earliest Christian Church of Jesus was apposed by the Pauline Christian theology created long after the crucifixion of Christ.

Take a look at the following site:

http://92.1911encyclopedia.org/E/EB/EBIONITES.htm

 

[musicman]

Originally posted by ajwps
Remember that the earliest Christian Church of Jesus was apposed by the Pauline Christian theology created long after the crucifixion of Christ.

Take a look at the following site:

http://92.1911encyclopedia.org/E/EB/EBIONITES.htm

This is your answer? Why not just quote the Gospel according to Fred?