Sri Lumpa said:
This only means it is real in catholic belief, not necessarily in other christian beliefs that interpret the bible differently as they may not accept those apparitions any more than you would accept apparitions from other religions.
I wasn't so much asking why he didn't do it as much as how is it not contradictory of the old testament.
So how can we use god's laws as moral precept if he will give us immoral laws to satisfy our wishes? Shouldn't he give only moral laws and punish those who disobey?
That's strange, earlier you were using the lady of fatima apparition, pointing to you being catholic, which is only reinforced by your profile saying you are in portugal which is mostly catholic. Don't you know that Mary, according to catholic belief, was born in an immaculate conception, that is she was free from the original sin and thus could not have passed it on to Jesus (and neither could Joseph as he was not the father). The catholic doctrine of the immaculate conception is to justify claiming Jesus as free from the original sin so why would he need to be purified from something that he was never tainted with? Note that I do not disagree with your interpretation as it is the same i was taught as a kid, but I am surprised that you would advance it. It is also possible that my understanding of the immaculate conception and its consequence in catholic belief is faulty. If so could you explain where I err? But my point was that if believing in Jesus's teachings as opposed to his divinity was enough then the addition of the baptism condition in the passage I quoted would be unnecessary. We agree on that interpretation but player1x3 disagrees.
I actually touched on that in an earlier post. If that was the case then there still would be no need for a belief in Jesus's divinity or god's existence because god, being omnipotent, could not only know if we did good but also why we did the good things we did.
But doing good for good's sake is not dependent on believing in Jesus' divinity. If you really believe that it is then you believe that every non-christian (atheists, muslims, hindus, buddhists, shintoists...) cannot do good for good's sake as they do not believe in the divinity of Jesus.
If find both heaven and hell as seen in mainstream christianity (so not player1x3's view) to be two forms of hell. The hell named Hell through "physical" torture (physical put in scare quotes due to not having a body so not physical but yet described as a torment of the body with flames... that you wouldn't care about if you didn't have a body to feel them). The hell named Heaven as a mental torture by lack of mental stimulation, i.e. boring you to death except you don't die and it lasts for eternity. I find it rather telling that christian imagery is so replete with detailed descriptions of what happens in hell but scant description of what happens in heaven and is more likely due to them being created by humans more expert in inflicting pain on others than in causing bliss. Besides, if depictions of hell were from god he would have been better of saying people would be cast in the Sun, a nuclear fire hotter than any hell conceived by man and with a pressure magnitudes worse than any clamp ever devised.
Well, no. It is literally "love me or burn in hell". How do you think girls would react if I tried that pick-up line? Would they interpret it as my unbounded love for them? |
The apparition wasn`t made in the name of a single religion. I think it`s better said as open for anyone to believe. That being, it may or may not clash with some interpretations of the Bible. In the end it`s a question of you believe them or not.
About the stoning, yes it does contradict the Old Testament. Like i said, Jesus showed a new way. What God did, was give us moral or rules that we could "understand", so to speak. He knew that at that time - or until Christ - men couldn`t "understand" He`s ways, so He actually did something that went agains He`s will.
This is way i made a special remark on this part. I don`t know much of religions but i don`t remember reading anything like this. More, it goes to show how He doesn`t subject people to He`s wishes. He cares to the point of letting us reach a point where we can begin to understand.
Mary was born in an immaculate conception, yes. Because she needed to be pure of heart and body to receive (lack of better word) the Son of God. Who was born, in that way, free from the original sin - i`m sorry i explained it wrongly in the first post!
Jesus teachings aren`t independent of His divinity, it´s part of Him as He always taught and lived what He was. You quoted above, and well, that only faith in Him will bring salvation. Therefore, being baptized was to show the way of salvation for everyone. To be born anew!
When i spoke of "the reason why" in regards to being good, i should had explained better. The reason that matters is that the good you do is seen as a reflexion of God in you. You do good deeds because you, believing in God, follow His heart and wishes. There could be lots of reasons to do good, even for good`s sake (as our human nature is good), but in the end this is the one that matters.
About the heaven and hell part, i don`t why you think it`s going to be boring! :D I have heard and read something about heaven and what i know is that it`s a place of never ending bliss or joy.
I don`t think that the being more quotes towards Hell is reason enough to think of it being a creation by someone. Honestly, only a person who really has read the Bible will be able to answer which part is more present in the Bible. I`ll admit i heavn`t read much of the Bible! :D
I didn`t said that love part to be read literally, it`s the message that i was trying to pass that was important. You always want people to love you for who you are and what you are.
You could say it`s heaven or hell, but it would just be "untrue" given what lies between both fates. It`s not like God doesn`t care about us, otherwise there would be no heaven in the first place.
