It depends on the religious group. See, how they normally do it is, they get a bunch of religious leaders to sit and go through the paper work and then decide, if they can interpret 'you' into their scripture similar to the trinity (obviously your question is aimed at Xianity). If the Pope or Minister or Priest says: "This is what you must think!"...All the sheep follow blindly no matter how ludicrous the belief might be. If I was you, I would start my own Religion instead. You can always use Jesus and other christian concept to make it more 'believable' if you run a popularity conquest.
You should never have false hope (faith) at any point, results are whats important.
2006-11-15 22:08:14
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
As a Catholic, i've got faith that any interpretation of the scriptures could be guided via the coaching and custom of the Church. that does no longer mean that there is one authorized interpretation for each financial disaster and verse, even with the indisputable fact that it does mean that there are huge limitations to paintings interior. case in point, the church has continuously taught, suited from he beginning up, that the resurrection grew to become right into a literal journey - so its individuals are certain to take the resurrection bills actually. they could even have symbolic or allegorical meanings, yet those are secondary to the literal one. The authority of the church to interpret scripture operates at various ranges. If a clergyman or a bishop delivers an interpretation, that interpretation merits respectful attention even with the indisputable fact that it is not binding. If an interpretation is got here upon in the writing of a saint (and distinctly a saint who's acknowledged as a 'wellbeing practitioner of the church') then it consists of substantial weight, yet continues to be no longer particularly binding. If an interpretation has been very broadly generally occurring in the historic previous of the church, then it may no longer be omitted without very solid grounds to realize this. And if an interpretation has been provided via the church as an infallible coaching, then it would be generally occurring as such. The authority of the church to coach and lead its individuals is asserted in the Bible - particularly in a million Tim 3:15, the place the church is named 'the pillar and bulwark of the reality'. The Catholic perception is this authority of the church is guided via the Holy Spirit (cf Jn sixteen:13, Acts 15:28), and that the church and the Bible are complementary to one yet another.
2016-10-22 04:38:20
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
True Prophets and Messengers had certain qualities. Now, each of the three monotheistic religions in the world expect a Messiah, not a prophet.
And each have certain criteria by which they will be able to recognize the Messiah.
With us Muslims, we look for certain things:
1. Is this person Jesus (may Gods peace and blessings be on him) and
2. is this person the Mahdi.
those are two different men.
Muslims believe Jesus will come down kill the anti-christ, and then live a normal human beings life till he dies a natural death.
while the entire world will be brought under one flag of nations by the man Prophet Muhammad called: Mahdi.
So if you said youre here by Gods orders, I would think, youre either one of those, not any old prophet mind u.
Qualities of Jesus and Mahdi:
1. Jesus will be reddish pale in skin and will have hair that looked like its been dampened by rain.
2. Mahdi will have parents whose first names resemble Prophet Muhammads parents and the Mahdi will be from Prophet Muhammads lineage.
End of Story.
2006-11-15 22:06:59
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
That is really the 'bottom line' of the whole issue of religion. To state it as I see it, what is your ultimate "Authority" for what you believe. Everyone has one be it your own mind, expereinces, a writing, science, logic, or a combination of them. I think every individual has to wrestle with that issue until they settle it. With Christianity we are taught that "authority" is the Bible. So that becomes the sandard by which we determine what is truth or not. At the end of the Bible it closes with a statement that no one is to add anymore to it, or take away from it, so if you came along and claimed (like Mohammed, or Joseph Smith etc) to have written a new book, we would automatically reject your claim.
2006-11-15 22:15:40
·
answer #4
·
answered by oldguy63 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Im with you on this one.... ive answered questions on religion and get loads of thumbs down for just having a different opinion when im not being rude or saying they should stop believing.
I dont have a religion i follow but kinda think there might be something more powerfull etc but that doesnt mean i cant live a good life with respect etc.
If you tell people God has spoken to you and told you nice things everyone who followed that faith would say thats great but if you told them he told you bad things then they would not believe you... a bit like people reading horoscopes.
I will without doubt have loads of thumbs down for having an opinion. lol
2006-11-15 22:10:42
·
answer #5
·
answered by 2 good 2 miss 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
A good point. I can only answer for the Catholic Church. We recognise that the people of every generation need a living voice to speak with authority on disputed questions. We take very seriously the words of Jesus to St Peter in Mt 16:18. Given that Jesus established an office with Peter's primacy and not just personal leadership to die with him, we believe that St Peter's successors, the Popes, guide the Church infallibly in matters of Faith and Morals. On any other issue they can make mistakes like anyone; these matters do not have our salvation resting on them, though.
2006-11-15 22:04:20
·
answer #6
·
answered by palaver 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Holy Messengers speak to the hearts, not to the ears. Mind and brain are different functions. You can dissect the brain; you can not 'see' your mind. that is the difference between ears and the spiritual hearts. If logic and democracy were to decide the 'winner' among claimants to 'Prophecy', then, every Prophet and every Messenger belonged to a minority and was outclassed by 'logicians'. Is the answer clear !
2006-11-15 22:39:29
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Many people claimed to be prophets Mohammed,David Kuresh,Joseph Smith (I'm sure there were more) ,but Jesus warned us saying "many will come in my name saying I am he but you will know them because a good tree bears good fruit"
How do we decide on the truth?......God gave us intelligence and most importantly He gave us a conscience.For example which is easy to claim '' turn the other cheek" or "eye for and eye and tooth for a tooth".How is it possible to corrrupt such words as "as long as you did it unto the least of these My brothers you did it unto Me".
2006-11-15 22:52:36
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I personally have faith in everything that is written in the Bible and in nothing that isn't in the Bible because Revelation ch 22 v 18 and 19 say
'If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book; and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.'
2006-11-15 23:44:14
·
answer #9
·
answered by Kari 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Mohammed already did that.
If you had told me ten years ago that I would be a Christian now I 'd have told you you were bonkers. The problem is, it is hard to describe to people who don't believe and how ever much you tell them about the promises of God it is down to them and Him. You can't walk there walk. Good luck my friend and keep searching.
2006-11-15 22:09:11
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋