"The Passion of the Christ" Thread

Time to take another tack.

The nuns at St. Pauls told me at least two lies. The first was that women could not get pregnant from being raped.

The second was that Jesus died the most horrible death ever.

In the book, "I Rhigoberta Manchu", her mother and brother are both tortured in ways that you would pray to be crucified.

Similarly, the various regimes in the past 20th century seemed to compete with each other in ways to keep people alive just so that they could debase, dehumanize and torture them.

I just read an article about the Aryan Brotherhood, and although prison deaths are quicker, I would indeed have to think at least for a bit about getting crucified or shived forty five times with my eyes gouged out.

I don't particularly think of this as a relevant point in terms of one's faith or beliefs. But the suffering aspect of the crucifixion, at least for me, has actually been somewhat softened by the realization that God has allowed many more brutal things to happen to His children.

 

He can't hold a candle to God.

He threw a whole species out of Paradise just for being embarrassed of showing their public hairs.

 

On a similar note, did all the people who died before Jesus go to hell?

 

According to Dante (no, not you) they are all in Purgatory. Just a matter of whether his works are in the group that you have faith in being true.

I, personally, follow Hesiod's works...and I never, ever, piss while looking into the sun.

 

No, not necessarily....

First, like all things, there is an age of accountability. God is the judge of us all. It is hard to suggest that an infant is to be held accountable for original sin.

Second, before Christ, there was the Law. The law given to Moses, from God. That is why the Hebrews made a sacrifice to God. The blood of the lamb was used to atone for sin. Jesus became the lamb to take on the sins of the world and bring each of us from the Law to grace. For it is the grace of God that allows each of us to know Christ in a personal way.

Attacking Minded: God knew us all before we were born. He knew us in the womb. Jesus died to forgive all sins, past, present and future. But first, you have to have a personal relationship with him. I know you understand my point, so no need expounding here.

The point is, when all of us die, each of us will be judged by God.

All of these points made by everyone skirts one important point. Each person needs to ask themselves what the status of THEIR relationship with God is?

 

This thread is demonstrating to me what the origin of evil is. That is the belief that one knows the absolute truth of everything, and all those who disagree are wrong and evil and doomed to hell/punishment/horrors/etc.

Just think about it. Every extreme evil doer(s) throughout history thought that they were completely justified in their actions, from Pontius Pilate, to Vlade the Impaler, to the Spanish Inquistion, to the Crusades, to Adolf Hittler, Joseph Stalin, the KKK, and Al Qaeda/Osama Bin Laden. They all thought that they were doing the right thing and had every right, even an obligation, to perpetrate their horrors.

I see this phenomenon in the likes of USAsoccer. Although I'm sure his intentions might be pure, it seems to me he thinks he knows the absolute truth. He does not realize that this sort of "moral clarity" is what leeds people to commit unspeakable acts of evil.

This is where the belief comes from that child molesting priests go to heaven and Gandhi is in hell . Thus, unspeakable acts of evil can be committed, completely rationalized by the perpetrator. USAsoccer thinks he is spreading the word of God and doing good by him, but in reality he is only spreading hatred and ignorance, an act of evil.

There is nothing wrong with being a Christian. It's thinking that Christianity is the only way, the only path to God, that is evil, and indeed scary.

 

I'm sorry you feel this way. I can only state that your suggestion that I am spreading hatred is unfounded.

I have simply stated what the bible states. I have not offered my opinion, although I was hounded for several pages of this thread to do so. You now suggest that I have.

The Bible states (not I) that Jesus is the way, the truth and the light. Jesus said that no one comes to father but through the Son.

As for priest who sins, compared to Gandhi, I ask YOU one question. In God's eyes, is there any difference to sin? For ALL have sinned and fallen short of God's Glory. All sinners need redemption....including Gandhi, including priest who commit the worst of sin. Gandhi is a sinner, like you and me, who needs Christ redemption...like you and me...

As for those Priests, Jesus stated that it was better for him that a large millstone were tied around his neck and where thrown into the sea than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin. That is pretty strong language for Priests who commit crimes against children. God will judge them. All of us need to worry about our own personal relationship with God. We will all be judged equally in his sight.

Jeff....your argument is not with me. It is with God's word.

 

We're ******** buddies.

 

First, I must complement you in your posts. You come off as sincere, well meaning, and even logical in how you put together you arguments.

There is now doubt that we humans are imperect, and we all have done things that we shouldn't. I do believe, though, that there are varying degrees of sin/wrong-doings.

Obviously, child molesting is one of the most horrible, unspeakable acts of evil one can do. However, by pure interpretation of the "words of God" as you have been saying based on your beliefs and your bible readings, a priest who commits this unspeakable act is will go to heavan simply because that priest has accepted Jesus as his lord and savior. Whereas Gandhi, one of the greatest perpetrators of love, peace, non violence and freedom, is in hell because his Hindu beliefs perhaps had him not accept Christ as his lord and savior.

This scenario is completely ludicrous to me, and does not represent what I (and countless millions) believe.

Actually, your last paragraph - "That is pretty strong language for Priests who commit crimes against children. God will judge them. All of us need to worry about our own personal relationship with God. We will all be judged equally in his sight. " - argues against the idea of accepting Christ as the only way to heaven. It takes into account the idea of ones deeds.

As for you spreading hatred - I am fully aware that is furthest from your intentions. But to speak of absolute truths, especially when it comes to who is going to heaven and who is going to hell, inadvertantly spreads hatred. It obviously angers people.

Perhaps you should consider what some of the most highly regarded Hindu Yogi's have said about the different religions - that they are all just different sides to the mountain (paths to the top), at the top is God.

 

Sorry if I insult all the believers but the hypocrisy inherent in this quote makes it hard for me to beleive that any thinking human being can follow this religion.

In other words... I can go Idi Amin on people all my life, but on my death bed, if I take Christ into my heart, I will be saved. All is forgotten ?

 

Thank God.

Yet that is exactly what the new testament says. You don’t agree. You are entitled to your personal opinion.

I have relationship through Jesus with God. There is no reason for me to use the qualifier "personal" to describe that relationship. In some ways, I am guided by God through my friends. In some ways, I am guided by God through my family. In some ways, I am guided by this forum (God help me). Not all my relationships with God are direct and only through Jesus. Some, dare I say, are through my church.

I believe that by using the qualifier "personal" that there are those who wish to separate the church from its role in guiding it's parishioners.

 

How's sex?

 

I don't know that I'd go along with that statement, I believe with all my heart that accepting God's forgiveness for sin through Jesus is the only way to salvation, however, it's not my duty to hold people who don't believe that to the same standards I hold myself to.

I don't believe that there's anything dangerous about thinking that what someone believes is right. If anything, I feel like a significant measure of a person's character is the strength of her or his convictions, whatever they may be. Truth, by nature, is exclusive, and I believe that Truth exists. However, you're right, trouble begins when people believe they can fully and completely understand truth and when they begin to impose their perception on others.

ricv56

 

Divine. Although my wife might say it is only a reward given for the atonement of past sins.

 

Uhhh, hold on a sec. Original sin - a taint we are all born with - doesn't apply to infants because they cannot be held accountable for it? But they can when older? What changes? How is this different than, say, an African tribesman who has never heard of Jesus?

How can you be held accountable for something you didn't do at one point in time, yet at another point in time not be held accountable for that same action?

 

Oman stole my point. Jesus couldn't have been the one true savior because crucifixion is so JV. Breaking on the wheel or some such, now that's varsity. I mean, think how much more redemptive and meaningful those two hours of film would have been. Like, God, hello?

 

Imagine if your bank teller dealt with you like this.

"Do I have $3,000 on my account?"
"Well, after reconciling GAAP principles, I can conclude that we all have money."

If he then told you "I guess you can accept that answer or not" you'd tell him to piss off. And my question is just that simple.

No, you have not.

OPINION. By your reading of the Bible, is Gandhi in hell, provided he never found Christ?

Ugh, not again. You may as well quote the phonebook, because what you've said makes no difference.

All it means is that you are a coward, because the correct answer is, of course, "I think Gandhi is in hell". Its OK, you can say it. I don't understand why you're so embarrased of your faith.

 

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_savh.htm

The widespread notion amongst italian catholics (meaning also priests) is the first one (vatican 2), not the ratzinger (what a moron, not only for that) one.

Not only, basically the notion is, you're good (in the limits of sinner human nature) you go to heaven (atheist, agnostic included).
If you do the evil but you then repent, you'll go to heaven.

so, very few (I'm talking about italy) would think that gandhi isn't in heaven now laughing at too formalist ppl.

I'm agnostic and so for the vatican 2 I would be directed towards hell, but me and the possible God have agreeded that I'm a good guy and so I will go to heaven if it exists.

 

Sardinia just started this discussion, and I want to continue it, so I'll go back to the nexus of it all...

I don't get why Protestants read this in only the most literal way possible. Most Catholics (that I've known) read "through the Son" to mean "by His example." That is certainly what I believed when I was Catholic.

Catholics don't believe you can earn your way into Heaven. In the end, it's the Big Guy's call, but they do believe you should do everything you can to ensure the ledger of your life comes out as positive as possible. Admission of sin isn't enough - atonement is required. It's God's call if you've atoned enough for your sins.

It's impossible to know, but most lay Catholics I know would probably believe that Gandhi is in Heaven and Jeffery Dahmer is not. Both fall short of "perfection" (one by belief, one by acts), but by a vastly different margin.

 

The Catholics have changed their view since about salvation pre and post Vatican II.

I was born in 1962, two years before Vatican II became the official church doctrine. I went to 12 years of Catholic school. Our second grade teacher was Sister Genevieve Teresa, who apparantly adhered to the old school pre-Vatican II days, even though by the time I was in second grade it would've been '69, 5 years after V II was official.

Now I grew up Roman Catholic, and my father's side of the family were pretty devout Italian Americans. My father's parternal grandparents were Abruzese (original family name Listorti) and maternal grandparents were Siciliani.

However, my mother did not grow up in a Catholic family. Her family were not church-going folk at all, and I have no idea what faith they grew up with other than "Protestant." My mother converted to Catholicism before she met my dad, but my grandmother (her mother) never did.

So here I am, in a Catholic school in second grade, being taught religion by the aforementioned Sister Genevieve Teresa, T.O.R., and she's telling us all about what happens after you die. She said that when Catholics die, they will be reuinted with all their loved ones who have previously died, and that we would all be hanging out with Jesus, all the saints and angels. So I asked her "but sister, my grandmother isn't Catholic. She's Protestant. Will I see her when I die?"

Her response? "No, Michael, only CATHOLICS will be permitted into the kingdom of God after death. I'm afraid that when your grandmother dies she will go to hell, and you will never see her again." I can remember begging my grandmother to convert to Catholicism so that wouldn't happen. I can remember crying myself to sleep at night thinking about the fact that when she died, she was going to hell, simply because she wasn't Catholic.

Now what kind of intolerant crap is that to teach to a seven year old kid? It's the same intolerant crap that evangelical Christians teach their kids. At least the Catholics changed their doctrine, but it took them nearly 2000 years to do so. Hopefully the evangelical Christian cults will eventually come to the same conclusion.

Oh, and if there is such a thing as heaven, Ghandi is chilling out there, partying it up with the Bhudda, Jesus and Mohammed.

 

Interesting theory you've got there. So in God's eyes all sins are alike? You know, the more I learn about this Christian God, the less I like the fella. I'd rather not share my room in heaven with Dahmer, to be honest. I'd rather share a cell in hell with Gandhi.

I think I prefer my Jewish God. Sure, he's not as cool, and his son never died for me, but at least he won't condemn most of my friends to a fiery pit of hell. Or anyone for that matter - we've got no hell.

(Incidentally, I've been in Dahmer's old dorm room. Creepy.)

 

Native: If someone has never heard of Jesus, will they go to hell if they don't believe in him?

Missionary: No, if they don't know, then they can't be expected to believe.

Native: Then why did you tell me?

 

Sorry, I don't mean all of them. I should've said the whacko fringe evangelical Christians, like the contingent who carry "God Hates Fags" signs to the funerals of AIDS victims, or who think that killing abortion doctors isn't such a bad thing, or who think anyone who isn't a Christian is going to hell.

I have no problem at all with the vast majority of Christians (or Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Bhuddists, etc.). It's the ones who want to force their beliefs down my throat that I object to.