melvin

Oh yes , jesus is the saviour from Wrath of God(Father)

 

BIBLE:

John 3:36 kjv

 

He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

 

My View: I`m a fan of Apostle`s Mark and Matthew not John. So, what ever John the Apostle says in the Bible in John3:36 to me is not a done deal. Like I`d rather follow the words of Narada and Vysadeva than what Yamaraja has to say.

 

 

Jesus is the Savior from the righteous Anger(Wrath) of God(Father).

 

 

My View: (Christ) Jesus is the Savior from the righteous Anger(Rudra) of God( Krsna).

 

 

Am i right?, melvin.

 

 

My View: Yes, Chandu. You`re correct.

 

 

 

Melvin, knowledge is factual, i.e., knowledge concerns what exists and what doesn’t, or what is true and what is not. Seeing something is generally not enough to know it is true. If you see a patient who appears to be seriously ill, you still have to examine the patient and apply scientifically established true medical knowledge and insight, in order to verify that the patient is indeed seriously ill and that he is not faking the illness or only has a minor illness that can be left untreated. Although medicine is not an exact science, only then you can say that you have knowledge of the patient’s illness, as opposed to just information and belief.

 

My View: Mr X was involved in an accident. So, It`s common sense or logical to ask Mrs X why Mr X met an accident. or what could Mr X`s injuries possibly be before giving my money to Mrs X after having been informed by Mrs X that Mr X being seriously ill needs assistance for a major operation. But there are people like me who don`t believe what is being said until they see it for themselves. So, in this case, I would rather not ask questions from Mrs X how and why but , without ado, go and see Mr X right away to the hospital where he is confined. Just seeing Mr X admitted in the ICU erases my disbelief. This acquired information is knowledge.

 

If one day you happen to see God, how would you know this is true and that you are not hallucinating? Unless somehow God makes it absolutely clear to you that He is indeed the Absolute Truth, you can’t be sure. Therefore, if I were God, I would reveal myself by altering your consciousness, such that you can directly experience and understand the absolute oneness of everything in God, including your own conscious being. That could proof His existence as set forth in Vedic literature. If you are able to understand absolute oneness, it can be logically inferred that everything else must necessarily be based on it. Thus, even God or Absolute Truth might be knowable as true fact, based on logical understanding. Only when you understand absolute oneness as the single axiomatic fact of reality, you can say that you have absolute knowledge..

 

 

MY View: Apostle Thomas didn`t believe in the risen Christ until he saw and felt his Master`s wounds.

 

 

 

 

So if belief is all that matters, then why bother with any evidence? Just believe whatever you want. If one person believes that Durga will grant him liberation, then Durga will grant him liberation. If someone else believes that Christ will grant him liberation, then Christ will grant him liberation. And similarly with Mohammed, Satan, Bart Simpson, Barack Obama, etc. Belief is all that matters!

Thomas, an apostle of Jesus, didn`t believe in the risen Christ until he saw and felt his Master`s wounds.

Please don't put words in my mouth.

 

Me and sant never agreed about Eternal punishment.

 

We are asking you about Eternal punishment as mentioned in bible.

I`m sorry, Chandu. That was how I saw it in Sant`s posting ( link no.96). I didn`t know it was me you referred if I believe in eternal hell or eternal punishment in hell mentioned in the Bible. Frankly, I have stopped discerning John`s revelation. I don`t to the figures 666 as symbol for anti-Christ. It`s only the versions of Mark and Matthew in the New Testament of the Bible which greatly influenced my Christian views about God.

Beautifully explained Smaranamji, all of us living on material plane can try to do our best to offer to Hari with sattva, and ateast be vegetarians.

Dear Holy Child of Cebu,

I don`t know if you can forgive me. I have been a carnivore all my life. I love to eat fried egg, fish marinated in vinegar with rice. I drink coffee with milk. For lunch I eat pork stew, noodles and rice. I drink ice cold Coca Cola. For dinner, I eat chicken fillet sandwich at Mcdonalds. Drink Nestea.

These are samples of what I eat my Lord. When I attend birthday parties and wedding receptions, I eat food serve as lauriat in a chinese restaurant where they serve cold cuts, steamed lapu-lapu fish with sweet and sour sauce, century eggs, fried chicken, roasted piglet, canton noodles, dumplings, and fried rice.

No matter how I try, I can never detach myself from eating these tamasic foods. I`m a sinner my Lord. But please do forgive my family, too. My friends, my co-workers, the community, the Catholic Church where I was baptized, my mentors at the Colegio del Sto. Nino where I was enrolled from kindergarten to high-school. They taught me that eating meat wasn`t a sin but what comes from the heart like lust, greed, murder, etc.

I may not be like my friends here who are vegetarians my Lord. Hope they can forgive me,too.

Yours truly,

Melvin

(www.basilicadelsantoninodecebu.org.ph)

It is just leaf, flower, water & fruit...no grain. And Krishna does not say that was his diet. That is just people letting their imaginations run wild. If Krishna - or anyone else - was on a diet of leaves, flowers and water, they would suffer from chronic anemia and would be unable to get out of bed. The verse does not mention rice, bread, yoghurt, carrot halwa and unripe mangoes. What is gonna happen to people who have been eating these items?

 

Stop reading your own wishes into the Gita and be honest. That verse has nothing to do with diet and no commentator worth his salt, has ever interpreted it that way.

 

Cheers

Oops, sorry. Of course, Krsna also ate rice, bread, fruits, etc. I thought non-veg food includes sea foods like sea weeds, fish. This was just reaction to what Sambya wrote that he would not likely offer non-veg food to a Bhavagan( or even to Kali or Durga). That I`m just telling him there`s a verse indicating Christ ate fish, a non-veg diet. But saying I stop reading my own wishes into the Gita and be honest. That the verse Krsna accepting a leaf, water, flower or grain has nothing to do with diet and no commentator worth his salt has ever interpreted it that way doesn`t answer Sambya`s question. Why you always talk that way?

Well we talk about hell in different context. There are heavenly planets and hellish planets. But from a closer inspection we see that if someone is on a heavenly planet but he is forgetfull of Krishna he is actually in hell although maybe enjoying all the amenities of heavenly birth like long life relative freedom from disease and discomfort, covorting with naked sweet young things in celestial pools of water etc.

 

We generally think of hell as intense physical suffering like being nailed to a cross or beaten through 21 marketplaces or having your demonic father try to kill you in so many horrible ways. But the fact is neither Lord Jesus Christ, Haridas Thakur or Prahlada Maharaja was in hell while under the attack of demons.

 

It's always a question of consciousness and not locality or external circumstance.

Do you think Bali Maharaj ( Prahlada Maharaj`s grandson) a King who lived in the palace was in hell even if he was considered a demon? If this is correct, are the atheists therefore constantly in hell even if they`re living morally and upright lives? Just because they are forgetful of Krsna. So, what is really your definition of hell? As far as I know, Jesus Christ went to hell and on the third day he rose again from the dead.

i was wondering whether there is any place in any accepted scriptures (not obscure ones) where krishna himself says that he doesnt eat these foods(including non-veg items) !!

 

although personally i can never recomend or support giving non-veg items to bhagavan ( even to kali or durga ) .

 

but this question still lingers in my mind . anyone has an answer ?

Krsna says when He`s offered a flower, water, grain or leaf, He accepts them. Nor have I read a verse in the Bhagavad-gita and Srimad Bhagavatam that Krsna accepted and ate non-vege stuff. There`s a verse, however, in the Bible indicating that Christ ate fish, a non-vege. But that`s another story.

No wait you havent understood what im saying.

ITs so basic.You only disagreed to it.

DOnt you beleive that you decide things based on the information you have.

Sant, believing is one thing. Seeing is another thing. In short, I don`t decide things based on information only. I have to see it in order to believe. This is what I think is knowledge. For example. I received an information from Mrs X that Mr X, a close relative have met an accident and needs my assistance to pay for his major operation. I have to see or call if possible Mr X first to verify if indeed Mr X is seriously ill before I decide to give money to Mrs X. Knowledge is obtained when I`m able to talk to Mr X on the phone or see him confined in the hospital.

Forgetfulness of Krishna is hell. The more we remember Krishna the more we attain freedom from hell.

In other words, Theist. Eternal punishment in hell according to Chandu which Sant have re-affirmed does exist but applicable only to our being forgetful of Krsna. So, the more we remember Krsna the more we attain freedom from hell. If I recall Srila Narada even went to hell not because he was punished but to remind the souls in hell to chant Hare Krsna Hare Krsna Krsna Krsna Hare Hare/ Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare.

Winning in a discussion about God means learning something about God. The positions of so-called winner and loser from the material point of view is meaningless.

Swami Ramdev winning his argument, Homosexuality- a defect cured by Yoga, in the Supreme Court is like winning the lotto jackpot, Theist.

What does primate agree on.What is you definiton of logic or knowledge primate.

What I really mean is that when two people agree to disagree over an issue say, logic or knowledge even if both have already reached the same conclusion, one is urged to do something just to disagree. In chess, it`s called a perpetual check. In short, it`s a draw( nobody wins in the discussion).

Hey you only said you beleive in eternal hell.

Yes, Sant. I believe in eternal hell so we can agree to disagree.

No this is confusing.What did you mean by eternal hell can you be clear sir.

I disagree with you Sant when you said there`s no such a thing as eternal hell. Only hell to agree.

I agree it’s all a matter of definition..

Sant, did you agree with Primate to disagree?

yamraj is himself not eternal.

Dont you know he was killed even before hell was destroyed by lord shiva.

Im sorry i still dont get what you meant by waht you said.

Even if Yamaraja got killed by Lord Siva before hell was destroyed there will always be another Yamaraja to supervise hell`s caretakers, the yamadutas. Otherwise, they would indescriminately snatch without ado souls of dying people of Ajamila`s caliber and send them to hell even if they uttered unoffensively Narayana`s name.

Yes. Although such knowledge doesn’t fit into any regular definition of knowledge. In this sense it would not be knowledge but belief. As yet, we can only speculate about Absolute Truth. Perhaps my definition of knowledge would change if Absolute Truth reveals itself. But I must admit, you win this one..

How I wish we could go fishing, Primate. My father and I used to fish on a fish pond brimming with assorted fish grown for commercial use. We use chopped shrimps as bait for the bottom fish and shreds of lechon(roasted pig) to catch bangus(milk fish) that fllourished near the surface of the water. You must wonder why the surface milk fish loves to eat pork and the bottom fish crustaceans. Well, it was common knowledge that the owner of the fish pond owns a hospital where her left-overs are being fed to the fish by the care takers of the fish pond. However, there was an incident why I vowed not to fish again on that fish pond. When my father all alone fished on the day Jesus Christ died(Good Friday) several years ago. He caught a milk fish that flipped above the surface which unsnapped the hook that caught the fish. With one blink of the eye pierched my father`s right eye who did not wear his eye glasses that time. He drove straight home carrying several milk fish he caught with the hook in his right eye. Left the fish and directly went to the hospital owned by the owner of the fish pond where it was removed by his eye doctor friend.

Wait melvin.Heaven itself gets destroyed at dissolution and even chritians beleive that heaven was created so how can you call it eternal.

It does have an end doesnt it.

When everything`s destroyed, Sant. There`s re-creation of heaven, purgatory, and hell. This is probably what I meant of eternal hell with Yamaraja still its warden. There`s always an end to the never- ending story and that` s during the time of dissolution. Yet when there`s rebuilding of what has been destroyed the same structures and systems comes back again. In other words, the whole jigamajig is a cycle.

Note, that the only exception to my own definition of knowledge, might be knowledge of the Absolute Truth. As discussed earlier, it can be logically understood that Absolute Truth cannot be inferred from any logical system, and it might simply reveal itself to us. In that case we would have knowledge (of the Absolute Truth) without logical understanding..

Where logic ends, knowledge of the Absolute Truth begins.

Great have you accepted the word meaningWaht does the word mean acording to you.prathishtaa

I wish someday we can play mental golf, Sant. You and I with Visnu who carries a club. Oh how I just love to swing this driver club and whoOp! Propel that golf ball way up in the sky and cloOp! Score a hole in one!

Wanna play 8 holes of golf, Primate?

So you believe in eternal hell.

Yes, Sant. I believe in eternal hell. You can go there if you like. But it doesn`t mean you will stay there for good except Yamaraja, a mahajana. He had no choice but stay in eternal hell. God gave him this assignment as hell`s eternal warden. There`s a temporary hell Christians may refer to as purgatory.

OK so he meant that not jesus is a myth but jesus being only savoir is a myth.

In the absence of Christ in Jesus, Sant, is a consideration he`s a myth. Just as the absence of Christ in Jesus as savior is a myth. Because we have faith Jesus is the Christ then he isn`t a myth to billions of Christians like me who believe Christ Jesus is God and Savior.

\

Sambya doesnt beleive in eternal hell.

NOr do i.

Chandu stop it.NOw isnt this making hinduism look bad that people now have another name to divide th hindus.

Yes. there`s indeed eternal hell, Sant. Try being inside a prison from 8am to 4pm, Monday to Friday. You`ll get to know what I mean. The fact is those who were given the sentence of life imprisonment is only an eye opener.

If Swami Ramdev`s petition to the Supreme Court is accepted then it`s a precedent to all the petitions that hold God as witness. Since as far as I know a motion to the court making God a witness to a crime is inadmissible evidence. A good example is the testimony from a criminal who confessed to a priest that he committed a henious crime. The word Yoga alone which means union with God may not sit well with the justices in the Supreme Court. May God enlighten them.

Interesting but I fail to see how it relates to anything I said. You'll have to talk golf with gHari.

IN GOlf, if hole no. 1(Link 40) was this statement from you, Theist: WE WILL HAVE TO AGREE TO DISAGREE Melvin. It took me 10 strokes to hole no. 2(Link 50). While it took you only 2 strokes to hole no.3(Link 52). In answering this link, it will perhaps take me 5 strokes to hole no. 4(Link 57) so on and so forth.

We will have to agree, therefore, to finish whatever we have discussed here in this thread on hole no. 18. Whoever has the number of strokes taken loses. Otherwise, the argument will never end. Unless, of course, we have to agree to disagree from now on. That would be a perpetual check in the game of chess.