"religion/theology?"
These are some of the key things that Jesus taught:
- that we should love our neighbor as ourself, even our enemies and those who hate us.
- that in order to be forgiven we must forgive.
- that if we harbor hatred, resentment and bitterness then we are guilty of murder.
- blessed are the peacemakers.
- that when you condemn someone you condemn yourself.
Do you not see how these teachings promote the ideals of peace and love? Which of these teachings do you oppose?
2007-12-11 03:10:34
·
answer #1
·
answered by TheNewCreationist 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
*sigh* You posted the question, and i'm a straight talker. If it's too hot in the kitchen, get out, as they say. So here goes. I am a Christian. I am still confused between a fundie and a non-fundie. (I am not exposed to the extremes of the US, i am in Sydney Australia). I believe homosexuality is a sin. All sin is judged as sin, whether it's big or small. Fornication is a sin. Stealing is a sin. Lying is a sin. I lie probably every day, you know, those little ones we say to cover our buts? In terms of homosexuality, i believe it is not of God's created order. He created Adam and Eve. Look at their bodies and the complementarity. That is His created order, and a way that He reveals Himself to us. Homosexuality is a corruption of this. In terms of how my belief practically outworks itself? Well, i live in possibly THE gay capital of the world. Half my school was gay. Heaps of people i know are gay. It's not something i give a huge amount of thought to. I do not feel a need to tell them they're sinning by doing that, but even if they weren't gay, they would be sinners because the bible says we are all sinners. I believe by the grace of God they can be restored to their created order, but it must come from a personal conviction in them by God, and not from outward pressure of well meaning but untactful Christians. Our job is to love them just as we are to love all people. I do believe everyone has the right to practice whatever lifestyle they want (provided they aren't hurting small unconsentual children etc). I have no desire to intefere with that right, because God gave everyone free will. However, i will boldly say what i believe as a Christian when asked, and i believe any homosexual who wants to try God's way should have the opportunity to do that through Christian ministries and accountability groups that are available to them. I personally know people who are healed from that lifestyle and they now have families and are practicing in ministry. So how about you carry on practicing your lifestyle with your beliefs, and you let us carry on with ours? There ya go!
2016-04-08 08:17:06
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, people that came along after Jesus SAID that he said it. Big, big difference!
Jesus lived and died a practising Jew. There are plenty of references to him teaching and praying in the synagogue. Judaism teaches that everyone goes to heaven, whatever their faith, if they lead a righteous life. Thus this would have been what Jesus believed.
If Jesus founded any religion, it was simply another strand of Judaism and almost certainly what we today know as Reform Judaism. So he would never have made the aforementioned remark.
Jesus never stated that Judaism was to be set aside nor replaced. It makes no sense to suppose that G-d, having made an ETERNAL covenant with the Jews, would suddenly grow fickle and recant on the very laws that He established in the first place.
Jesus lived and died a practising Jew. I really feel it's time that the Christian community accepted this.
2007-12-11 02:48:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
1⤋
Doesn't this board kind of prove that too? If I were to believe all of the postings on this board then I would have to believe that I am brainwashed, ignorant, close minded, bigotted, racist, hateful, judgmental, hater of science, illogical, hypocritical...I could go on and on and on. So, atheists on this board say basically the same thing as Jesus did.
I believe this to be true (about Jesus, you are either with Him or against Him), but I do not feel that is how we view people. I don't see all unbelievers as against ME, I see them as against Jesus, which they are. I can still love them, pray for them, befriend them, share with them, etc. How many times have you, or others, accused a believer as being against...science, reason, logic, sanity, tolerance, etc?
2007-12-11 02:51:34
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Perhaps, but that statement does not begin to cover what it means to be "with him" or "against him". There are many different interpretations of that statement.
Some have interpreted that to mean that one has to believe literally in every word of the Bible. Others think it means you don't have be literal but you just have to believe that Jesus is the savior. Other, that you need to follow Jesus' example in the kind of life you need, and that faith is less important than deeds.
So it is not just the words but how one interprets and applies them.
In my opinion, the more broadly one applies that statement, the closer one is to promoting the ideals of the religion, or any religion, and that is what is important.
2007-12-11 02:51:16
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
"There is a valid sense in which, for those of us who are Christians, Christianity is the only true religion, the only one for us. For we have been formed by it. It has created us in its own image, so that it fits us and we fit it as no other religion can. And so for most of us who are Christians it is the right religion, and we should stick with it and live it out to the full. But we should also be aware that exactly the same is true for people formed by the other world religions. They also should stick with the religion that has formed them and live it out, though in each case gradually filtering out its ingrained claim to unique superiority.
"So the bottom line, I am suggesting, is this: we should live wholeheartedly within our own faith, so long as we find it to be sustaining and a sphere of spiritual growth, but we should freely recognise the equal validity of the other great world faiths for their adherents, and we can also be enriched by some of their insights and spiritual practices. We should not see the other religions as rivals or enemies, or look down upon them as inferior, but simply as different human responses to the divine reality, formed in the past within different strands of human history and culture. And we should seek a friendship with people of other faiths which will do something to defuse the very dangerous religious absolutism that is being exploited in almost all the conflicts going on in the world today. To support religious absolutism is to be part of the problem which afflicts humanity. But we can be part of the solution by setting an example of transcending that absolutism."
2007-12-11 02:52:45
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
I think it's important to note that, if that is really in the Bible, then it's Jesus' followers saying Jesus said that, not necessarily Jesus himself.
If Christians actually followed the teachings of Jesus, I might be okay with them.
2007-12-11 02:50:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by Phoenix: Princess of Cupcakes 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Wrong. Jesus did not say that. People who made up the story said that, and it's a very convenient phrase for religious leaders to use, so that their "followers" will feel like they have no choice -- they either follow the church or they go to hell. This is why we have so many wars. Don't you think a really good religion wouldn't have to guilt or threaten people to follow it?
2007-12-11 02:47:12
·
answer #8
·
answered by JeffyB 7
·
5⤊
1⤋
Proof positive that organized religion, especially Christianity, is nothing more than a means to divide people and set them against each other.
Instead of following divisive, superstitious mythology, wake up and educate yourself. Treat people the way you would want them to treat you.
2007-12-11 02:48:14
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
I wish you'd cited a passage so I could see what you're talking about. I don't remember that passage, not to say it couldn't be there, just that if you want to set a premise, it's best to cite your source since you can't expect the world to take you on your word.
2007-12-11 02:49:08
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋