My Lord said:

"it is more difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of Heaven than it is for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle,"

what if my Lord where walking this earth in these days with things the way they are nowadays, would you think He would say something like:

"it is more difficult for a judgmental and bigot "christian" to enter the kingdom of Heaven than it is for an atheist with a sincere and honest heart."

what if that judgmental and bigot "christian" is me?

then the true god in heaven the heart speak, and lead into all ways of WHOLE truth that lift one up higher than the heavens to see all of humanity, and how each is plauged, and WHAT plague each, and if any be lifted up, then eyes of GOD or understanding and wisdom can be looked thru, that see the whole world as first innocent, and THEN oneself is truly innocent of all now and forever, and the reasons for all that happen are explained by the heart even as one walks, and THEN one becomes an ambassador for all that are enslaved, and is made free to SEE and to SPEAK what break the binds that chain, that convince each they are BAD and DEFECTIVE..........peace

no greater wisdom hath a man that see his own heart......

I would ABSOLUTELY love to see the Lord walking the earth these days..... boy, would I!

he is walking the earth these days, in each person met on the road of life.............

From my point of view the whole religion that has been built up around Jesus and the Bible seems to me be extremely self-inconsistent. This is why I had to distance myself from it.

I have stated many times that if there could be a religion based solely on the moral teachings of Jesus I'd be it's greatest supporter and preacher!

Unfortunately Jesus isn't the God of the Bible. The real God of the Bible is the God of Abraham. The God of the Old Testament. The God who carved into stone, "Thou shalt not have any other gods before me".

This is the same God who taught without ambiguity in the Old Testament that follows of this God are to murder heathens and non-believers. This is what the Old Testament Says. God tells the people that if anyone comes to them to preach of any other God it is their DUTY to look into the matter. And if true, that false preacher should be murdered. And it doesn't stop there!

The Bible also goes on to demand that the entire village from whence that preacher came must be totally destroyed. Every man, woman, and child must be killed. Everything in that village must be destroyed. All the animals and material possessions. And the village is to be burned to the ground and no one is ever to build upon that site again.

This is no trivial stuff.

This God clearly HATES non-believers and hold no mercy for them whatsoever.

And God clearly asked the people to do this. He said that it is their DUTY to do it. They aren't supposed to stand around and leave it up to God.

So is Jesus this same God?

The man who preached not to judge others and to turn the other cheek?

I don't see how Jesus could possible have anything to do with the God of Abraham unless God has a major change of heart between the Old and New Testaments.

Christians like to focus on Jesus. They always turn to Jesus for answers.

However, many of them (including prominent mainstream preachers) clearly go rooting around in the Old Testament to find things to judge people on. The whole thing about God hating homosexuality, for example, all comes from the Old Testament. Homosexuality isn't even brought up in the New Testament.

This is why so many people say that Christianity is a hypocritical religion. Jesus says one thing, but the God of Abraham says something entirely opposite.

Which God are you going to believe?

They both can't be God because they clearly have opposing views on things.

Jesus says not to judge others, and to turn the other cheek.

The God of Abraham demands that we judge others and even stone them to death based upon our judgments!

How can both of these be the same God?

As far as I'm concerned it's a rhetorical question. They can't be the same God. Period. And since Jesus can't be made into a stand-alone religion I don't see how the religion can be salvaged.

The only thing I can see, is that people can decide to accept Jesus as just another spiritual man (not unlike Buddha). They'd have to give up the virgin birth, the idea that Jesus blood can wash away their sins, and the idea that Jesus miraculously rose from the dead. They'd have to see all of that as demagoguery added to the story of his life after he died.

But they could view his moral teachings as a great gift to mankind.

However, like I have stated many times, Jesus was not the only man to teach these very same moral values. Many men taught them. Some weren't even religion men. Some where just poets, songwriters, and other mortal men and women.

abra......i believe all that you say, and why you say it, but indeed see that it is the READING of such things by a mind that SEEK saving and PERSONAL GOODNESS that do not allow the WHOLE TRUTH to be SEEN......

the perception of a being make for what is seen, or heard, or even felt........

if one read a book about success, and in the heart personal success is the greatest GOD, then even innocent REAL truth can be turned into greed and even violence.......does this mean the book was evil, or was it the reader that interpreted with these things in the heart.......

There are enough camels around here ... Im sure if the needle is big enough, I could push the smelly creatures through the eye!

James:

I want two address a couple of things.

- First, who are those who look back to the Old Testament to find reasons to judge others? FUNDAMENTALISTS. (I'm sorry for keep repeating myself. But I think that those who have distorted and perverted christianity are the fundamentalists).

- Second, I think you are being very literalist in interpreting the old testament. (Again that is up to you).

- Third, If you realize the manned of speech in the new testament it's absolutely different from the old testament. I think this happened because people was absolutely misinterpreting God's revelation.
People gave God the image of a warrior (which is natural considering the times and how people were. Even now Man is a destructive animal who creates wars for egotistical interests. For example: Iraq.)
Jesus came to correct that image and gave us a God who is a loving Father.
This idea is the idea which makes me a christian.
To be honest for me the new testament is three things:
- an alegorical book with several inspired tales with the purpose to educate me on some theological principles (for instance: creation and original sin).
- an historical book which tells the history of the hebrews.
- a wisdom book for instance: the proverbs and the psalms.

TLW

On your first comment about Fundamentalists. I agree that fundamentalists are the ones who stir up the trouble. However, the fact remains that it is the Old Testament gives them the ammunition they need to stir up trouble and claim that they are doing it in the name of God.

On you second comment,... How can we not talk about being 'literal' when the whole religion is based on a literary work? It's a belief in a doctrine. The literary work is the only thing the religion has to offer.

Sure, people say, "Let The Holy Spirit Guide You!" But if those words had any merit at all then the Holy Spirit could guide you without the need for any physical instruction manual. So, from my point of view, that whole philosophy is moot.

Besides, why would God allow his book to contain things he didn't want to say?

Why would God allow the book to claim that he wanted people to murder non-believers, and to stone sinners, and unruly children if this wasn't his wishes?

This flies in the face of the book being the "Word of God".

Either it is, or it isn't. You can't just pick and choose what you'd like to believe and what you'd prefer not to believe. Once you start that you may as well just toss the doctrine away altogether. It becomes nothing more than a personal subjective "Designer Religion".

In fact, I could do that myself. I would denounce probably about 75% of what the Bible says.

Can I do that and still claim that I'm recognizing the book as being the "Word of God"?

For me, the bottom line is extremely simple. Either the book is the "Word of God" or it isn't. If it is, then every word in it must be valid. If that's not the case, then which words do you decide are real, and which are not???

You can't have a religion that claims to have a doctrine that is the "The Word of God", and then claim that it shouldn't be taken literally!!!

That's nothing short of absurd.

I mean, this isn't a personal thing for me. I'm not meaning to pick on anyone's belief. But at the same time I think it's only fair to explain why it appears to be so totally absurd to me that its truly difficult for me to see why anyone would believe it.

You say, "Here, this book is the Word of God,... But don't take it literally!"

What???

That sounds like a line for a Jay Leno Skit.

Seriously. It does.

No personal offense intended. I admire you greatly Miguel and I know that you have nothing but the very best of intent. But at the same time, I just don't see how you can just pick and choose which parts of the Bible you'd like to believe and which parts you'd just as soon ignore.

I have often said that Christianity is the religion that would like to praise Jesus and sweep the God of Abraham under the carpet. I sincerely believe that this is true. They worship Jesus, they don't worship the God of Abraham. They just say, "Don't take those parts literally"

I was raised as Free Methodist and that's precisely what they attempt to do. They pretend to recognize the God of Abraham, but in truth they don't. They focus almost entire on Jesus and genuinely try to sweep the God of Abraham as far under the carpet as they can push him. Of course, they won't confess to doing this, but it is what they do none the less.

I don't know how the Catholics deal with all the inconsistencies to be perfectly honest about it. Although I should know as most of my childhood friends where catholic. But in all honesty they didn't seem to be concerned with questioning or understanding the details. They seemed to be more concerned with fulfilling rituals. At least that's the impression I got from my childhood friends.

James here is the Catholic position.
By Heinrich Joseph Dominicus Denzinger
(It's long, so it's OK if you don't want to read it).


2293 Well equipped with a knowledge of ancient languages and with the help of critical scholarship, let the Catholic exegete approach that task which of all those imposed upon him is the highest, namely, to discover and set forth the true meaning of the Sacred Scriptures. In this work let interpreters keep in mind that their greatest care should be to discern and define what the so-called literalsense of the language of the Bible is. Let them bring out this literalmeaning of the words with all diligence through a knowledge of languages, employing the aid of the context and of comparison with similar passages; indeed, all these are customarily used for assistance in the interpretation of profane writers also, so that the mind of the author may become quite clear. Moreover, let the exegetes of Sacred Scriptures, mindful of the fact that they are dealing with the divinely inspired word, no less diligently take into account the explanations and declarations of the magisteriumof the Church, and likewise the explanation given by the Holy Fathers, and also the "analogy of faith," as Leo XIII in the Encyclical letter, Providentissimus Deus, very wisely notes.* Indeed, let them see to this with special zeal, that they explain not only those matters which are of concern to history, archaeology, philology, and other such disciplines as we grieve to say is done in certain commentaries, but, after bringing in such matters opportunely, insofar as they can contribute to exegesis, point out especially what is the theological doctrine on matters of faith and morals in the individual books and texts, so that this explanation of theirs may not only help teachers of theology to set forth and confirm the dogmas of faith, but also be of assistance to priests in clarifying Christian doctrine to the people, and finally serve all the faithful to lead holy lives worthy of a Christian.

When they have given such an interpretation, especially, as we have said, theological interpretation, let them effectively silence those who assert that with difficulty do they find anything by way of Biblical commentary to raise the mind to God, nourish the soul, and promote the interior life, and declare that recourse must be had to a certain spiritual and so-called mystical interpretation. How far from rightly they profess this the experience of many shows, who frequently considering and meditating upon the word of God, perfect their souls, and are moved by a strong love toward God; and this is clearly proved by the everlasting institution of the Church and the admonitions of the most eminent Doctors. Surely, all spiritual meaning is not excluded from Sacred Scripture. For what was said and done in the Old Testament, was most wisely so ordered and disposed by God that past events in a spiritual manner presignified what would take place in the new covenant of grace. So the exegete, just as he should find and expound the so-called literalsignificance of the words, which the sacred writer intended and expressed, so also he should the spiritual significance, provided it can be rightly established that it was given by God. For God alone could know this spiritual significance and reveal it to us. Indeed, the divine Savior Himself indicates such a sense to us in the Holy Gospels and teaches us; the apostles, also, imitating the example of the Master, in speaking and writing profess this; so does the teaching handed down by the Church; finally, the ancient practice of the liturgy declares, wherever that famous pronouncement can rightly be applied: The law of praying is the law of believing. So, let Catholic exegetes make clear and set forth this spiritual sense, intended and ordained by God Himself, with that diligence which the dignity of the divine Word demands; but let them beware religiously lest they proclaim other transferred meanings of things as the genuine sense of Sacred Scripture.

Kinds of Literature in Holy Scripture *

[From the same Encyclical, "Divino afflante Spiritu," September 30, 1943]

2294 Therefore, let the interpreter with all care and without neglect of the light which the more recent investigations have shed, strive to discern what the real character and condition of life of the sacred writer were; in what age he flourished; what sources he used whether written or oral, and what forms of expression he employed. Thus he will be able to know better who the sacred writer was, and what he wished to indicate by his writing. For it escapes no one that the highest norm of interpretation is that by which what the writer intends to say is perceived and defined, as St. Athanasius advises: "Here, as it is fitting to do in all other passages of divine Scripture, we observe that it must be accurately and faithfully considered on what occasion the Apostle has spoken; what is the person and what is the subject on which he has written, lest anyone ignorant of these things, or understanding something else besides them, wander from the true meaning."*

But what the literal sense is in the words and writings of the old oriental authors is very often not as clear as it is among the writers of our age. For what they wish to signify by words is not determined by the laws of grammar or philology alone, nor by the context of the passage alone; the interpreter should by all means return mentally, as it were, to those remote ages of the Orient, in order that rightly assisted by the aid of history, archaeology, ethnology, and of other disciplines, he may discern and perceive what so-called literary genres the writers of that age sought to employ and in fact did employ. For the old Orientals, to express what they had in mind, did not always use the same forms and the same modes of speaking as we do today, but rather those which were accepted for use among men of their own times and localities. What these were, the exegete cannot determine, as it were, in advance, but only by an accurate investigation of the ancient literatures of the Orient. Furthermore, such investigation carried on within the last ten years with greater care and diligence than before, has shown more clearly what forms of speaking were employed in those ancient times, whether in describing matters in poetry, or in proposing norms and laws of life, or finally in narrating the facts and events of history. This same investigation has also proven this clearly, that the people of Israel were especially pre-eminent among the rest of the ancient nations of the Orient in writing history properly, both because of the antiquity and the faithful recountal of events; which indeed, is surely the effect of divine inspiration, and the result of the special purpose of biblical history which pertains to religion. Indeed, let no one who has a right understanding of Biblical inspiration, be surprised that among the Sacred Writers, as among the other ancients, certain definite ways of explaining and narrating are found; certain kinds of idioms especially appropriate to Semitic languages, so calledapproximations,and certain hyperbolic methods of speaking, yes, sometimes even paradoxes by which events are more firmly impressed upon the mind. For none of those methods of speaking is foreign to the Sacred Scriptures which among ancient peoples, especially among Orientals, human speech customarily used to express its thought, yet on this condition, that the kind of speaking employed be not at odds with the sanctity and truth of God, just as with his usual perspicacity the Angelic Doctor has noted in the following words: "In Scripture divine matters are made known to us in the manner we customarily employ.'' * For just as the substantial Word of God was made like man in all things "without sin," * so also the words of God, expressed in human language, in all things have been made like human speech, without error,. which Saint John Chrysostom has already extolled with highest praise as the(greek text deleted)or, condescension of a provident God; and which he has asserted * again and again is the case in the Sacred Scriptures. Therefore, let the Catholic exegete, in order to satisfy the present day needs of Biblical matters, in explaining Sacred Scripture, and in showing and proving it free of all error, prudently use this aid, to inquire how the form of expression and the kind of literature employed by the Sacred writer, contribute to a true and genuine interpretation; and let him be convinced that this part of his office cannot be neglected without great harm to Catholic exegesis. For not uncommonly---to touch upon one thing only---when some propose by way of rebuke that the Sacred Authors have strayed away from historical truth, or have not reported events accurately, it is found to be a question of nothing other than the customary natural methods of the ancients in speaking and narrating, which in the mutual intercourse among men were regularly employed, and in fact were employed in accord with a permissible and common practice. Therefore, intellectual honesty requires that when these matters are found in divine speech which is expressed for man in human words, they be not charged more with error than when they are uttered in the daily use of life. Therefore, by a knowledge and accurate appraisal of the modes and skills of speaking and writing among the ancients, many problems will be possible of solution, which are raised against the truth and historical trustworthiness of the divine Scripture; and no less fittingly will such study contribute to a fuller and clearer understanding of the mind of the Sacred Writer.

abra.....

there are many meanings for words spoken, and the meanings chosen show what the hearer has in the heart.......

so what be in your heart, as you have chosen all the words written in text to be viewed as ignorance.......

if one say the words slave.....this has many meanings......

one is a slave in love, in fear, in bondage to many things....not just a physical slave to a master, but then fear or love can be a master as well.......

if one say the word murder, this has many meanings......

for one to die to themself and their own small wisdom in text it is spoken to be such as MURDER......it is also spoken that any that SPEAK AGAINST ANOTHER HAS AS IF COMMITTED MURDER....so could it be that if one was told to SLAY others within text that this could have meant with the SWORD OF WORDS........

there is no self wisdom that can make sense of text, but indeed if the text say TREE, then within the text one must look to see what a "tree" is........A PERSON.......

text interperet itself, and is as long and deep as the universe itself, and why the meaning of the mind of what it mean can never be relied on, JUST AS YOU SAY.........AGREED!

all the things you have against such are vaild, and indeed wisdom, but there has to be more truth than "each that died for such truth was ignorant, or blind"..........this would make ones own heart think THEY be wiser than all their fellow men in times past........can this be the path to MORE understanding then had then?

what can be wiser unless it FIRST SEE what another seen to act as they did, and THEN add this to ones own understanding, making wisdom GROW...........

if one seek to find truth, to believe all as true, and to TRY hardest to PROVE it true, leave the untruth exposed easily.......to find truth by seeking to disprove find noting more than what one MOST wishes to find.......

all that "YOU BELIEVE IS TRUE" and have professed here many times, is written word for word within the very text you say is not true.........peace

You can't ever get to heaven through works....only through "FAITH".

If the Lord was walking the earth I think he would drop to his knees and tell the Father God, "They again know not what they speak.

There is only one Judge and anyone that feels the need to judge another is very very sad indeed.....Now I also think there is a difference between judging and hold people accoutable......To walk as the Lord would like is a very very narrow path....

A quick question for any? If an athiest does not believe in "God" Does it matter if their heart is good? imo they will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. And this is not a judgement.....this is a truth. For if the only way to heaven is through FAITH and athiest does not have faith...because he has no belief in God....nor in heaven.

Jesus quoted the Old Testament, so should Jesus be called a fundamentalist?

I'm a fundamentalist. I believe that the Old and New testaments are the foundation and are FUNDAMENTAL to Christianity.

What I think is amazing is that people who don't even believe in God are often some of the best people you'll ever meet.

Don't you think it's ironic that these supposedly inherently evil people choose to be nice kind people on their own even though they don't even believe in a God?

Kind of flies in the face of the idea that men can only resist sin with the help of God. In fact, atheists have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that this ideal cannot possible be true. There are many really nice people who do not believe in God thus proving that humans can be nice without turning to God for help.

The really sick thing that truly disturbs me is that Christians who think they are going to heaven whilst decent people will be rejected don't seem to have a problem with that.

In all honesty I have to say that I would definitely not want to be where they are going. I would not want to be in a place that is full of people who think that way. It might be heaven for them, but it would truly be hell from my perspective. I would not associate with such people. I would rather die.

TLW,

Do people go to Heaven because they are good people? I thought that it was salvation due to Jesus' work on the cross.

I don't recall ever saying that they were not good people......did I now!!!!!!!!!


And again stop twisting words to fit your needs....I also never called any athiests evil people. I have a lot of athiest, panthiest, and people that just believe whatever it is they do as friends........

Regardless of what man believes if he lives a life that is good, and is kind, and is sweet, and just are the greatest things since slice bread...that is all well and good.

I have always been a nice person, helping anybody that needed it.....I have always always looked for the good in all people.....It's not a matter of being nice without turning to God. What I hear a lot of is. I am a nice person, I am good to people so I will go to heaven....nope it's not that simple.

And again if people don't want or believe in God....I am way ok with it...But also give the respect that is given back......I do not have a choice of what happens to people abra....that's their choice...

And again it's your choice to want to be wherever you want to be when that time comes....I am neither your judge or anything else....but give the same respect to those that believe as they do.....It does work both ways.

feral:

A quick question for any? If an athiest does not believe in "God" Does it matter if their heart is good? imo they will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. And this is not a judgement.....this is a truth. For if the only way to heaven is through FAITH and atheist does not have faith...because he has no belief in God....nor in heaven.

tribo:

first off i don't believe there are atheist, only agnostics. If you say you don't believe in god - to first do so, you have to have a concept or concepts of what god or gods are claimed to be by others. If you understand those basic concepts and then come to a conclusion you don't believe in he or them, then it can't be said you don't believe in him/her/it/them. you are just making a statement that you don't believe in or accept them as such as they are stated to be by others.

now if an agnostic states he does not accept your god or other gods as gods, that has nothing to do with the condition of his heart as to emotions or feelings. It is not a matter of does it matter, only of whether or not he has one. The answer then is, it matters if its "good" or not to those who are agnostics and those who are in their lives and know them.





deb:

imo they will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. And this is not a judgement.....this is a truth. For if the only way to heaven is through FAITH and atheist does not have faith...because he has no belief in God....nor in heaven.

TRIBO:

but it is a judgement deb, based on your held beliefs, can't you see that? It's a truth to only those that hold your concept of god/jesus and what will be when we die. Your faith and what you put it in, will get you and those like you where you think your going to go. those things held by others will get them where they think they will end up also. all have faith, your is in your belief's, mine are in mine, jb,hers, abra, belushi, etc.

you believe you have to have faith in "your god" to go to his heaven, so for you and those of the same mind as you that is "your" truth. i believe differently, those are my truth's. no matter who thinks they are correct matters not to any but those who think they have to change others minds to believing what they believe, that is where the real problem comes in deb.

You and all others like you want to try an interject into each post that is placed by anyone differing in their beliefs or what they have faith in, that there is a better way to think and be than what they now believe. In turn it makes it almost impossible for those who may want to speak on other spiritual matters to do so, knowing they will have to hear from all of you that are here. This is why i asked M2 to start a "spiritual forum" separate from the dominantly "christian forum" that this forum has turned into.

It's not that i don't think you have or should have all the freedom to believe as you will, more power to ya, it's just I for one am tired of hearing about it or discussing it with those here, i know your takes on things, there not going to change and we are not going to change each others belief's nor should we, so why frustrate ourselves by continuing to do so?

let each believe as they will - if someone wants to know about your beliefs, they can go to your christian chat room and ask and find out, if they are seeking others comments then they can ask those here about those spiritual things they believe or follow. Discussing and debating religion is tiresome and gains no one any good as it is applied, discussed, or argued on here.


Lastly - be all you can be as your faith and beliefs lead your life deb, and the other's here will do the same as they follow with theirs, though different than yours they may be.

Live and let live, be and let be. read and learn of others without comment or condemnation, or offering your faith without being asked to do so. If you do this, i will do the same, and others will see and maybe this will become a forum where people can learn and understand all others here that think differently. OK?

sincerely, tribo/sam