chandu_69

. I agree.Also agree to the unsaid part.All flowers are not roses.

Yato mat tato path(As many views as many PATHS). Famous?, yeh. Even if those paths turned humanbeings in to killers and slavers. Yes, all are valid paths... Back to neo-hinduism and universalism.

The term is αιώνιος in romans 6:23 αιώνιος is an adjective of αLώνιος.It represnts eternal timeless, forever etc.. The term is used to describe god as eternal in Bible(Nt). αἰώνιον is the term used by Jesus to describe eternal fire.Here is the actual link with Greek Matthew 18:8 Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire. You are trying to imply something spiritual in bible where as what you see is father son duo scaring the hell outta people. Father is ready to punish Son is ready to save. Add some thing in between to fill up an otherwise dry and boring narration.

He has to consider future consequences for his wife.Try to think before dispensing advice.

True.They(The Vatican) don't want to be seen contradicting Jesus on his explicit statements of Eternal fire in Hell while trying to sound more civilized than islam. " When The same word aionios(greek) is used to describe Eternal life it should also describe Eternal hell. That is an opinion which is not supported by Jesus explicit words.It is no wonder Vatican tries unsuccessfully to give spin while not explicitly disowning jesus's statements A good number ordinary Christians(not the Evangelical types who tries to scare people and convert) are coming around to that view but the official church cannot take that position as evidenced by their doctrinal stance.

What constitutes The basic teachings of Jesus?. One can take out gospels of John if one wishes to, since john wrote those gospels after Passing away of Jesus.

This person has to be careful in declaring in public about the erstwhile religion of his wife. The following Islamic site also confirms that Any person leaving islam shall be killed. Source of the Punishment for Apostasy - IslamonLine.net - Ask The Scholar The site lists the hadiths.

Not exactly.Pope John paul 2 expressed his desire that Hell be described differently then what is proclaimed by Jesus. The official Church represented By respective denominations of catholics, protestants, Southern Baptists etc Affirm that punishment in Hell is real and eternal for those who don't accept Jesus as Savior. Only a small minority of christians like seventh day adventists reject Eternal hell.

How would some body rate the following Leveticus 20:9 For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him. Can you say Christ is another matter if he endorses it?. It seems Jesus Endorses the Old testament to the dot and specifically Lev 20:9

That is correct.The vatican apparently doesn't approve the "personal opinion" of Pope john paul 11 as evident from the webpage link i gave above in post 86. The present Pope also disagrees with Pope john paul 11. The fires of Hell are real and eternal, Pope warns The fires of Hell are real and eternal, Pope warns - Times Online Hell is a place where sinners really do burn in an everlasting fire, and not just a religious symbol designed to galvanise the faithful, the Pope has said.

Jesus, Apparently.You are unnecessarily wasting bandwidth $$ of this site. I have already posted this and the vatican affirmation twice. Matthew 18:8 Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire. http://bible.cc/matthew/18-8.htm

Here is a repetition of Vatican's Position on eternal hell. http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a12.htm Quote 1034 Jesus often speaks of "Gehenna" of "the unquenchable fire" reserved for those who to the end of their lives refuse to believe and be converted, where both soul and body can be lost.614 Jesus solemnly proclaims that he "will send his angels, and they will gather . . . all evil doers, and throw them into the furnace of fire,"615 and that he will pronounce the condemnation: "Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire!"616 1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, "eternal fire. . "617 The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs. Unquote...

I am not discussing the validity of reincarnation.I am merely saying Bible doesn't support the theory of reincarnation.Plain and simple. The link you gave describes Augustine's thoughts.There is nothing to suggest that Augustine interpreted Biblical material to support his theory of reincarnation. I would address the first verse Deuteronomy. 18:10-11, NIV "who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead". One should know a bit about Judaism to understand this verse. Judaism says The spirit of the dead persons is alive awaiting Judgment day.This doesnt suggest that the dead are going to reappear in bodies. I accepted your correction.What are you complaining at?. . Not at Main centre stage.There are only few people who suggested reincarnation.And that suggestion was shotdown by Majority because it doesnt have Biblical support. Reincarnation is a topic of far reaching Implications and if the Bible(Old and new) wants to take a stand it will say clearly in no uncertain terms.Augustine didn't use biblical material to suggest reincarnation.He was only trying to rationalize "God is Good" doctrine. It was dubbed heretical because Bible didnt say it.Simple. "Once to die" ;That is the key phrase. But there is also Jesus, Elijah: the sons of god and holy spirits....Holy spirits appear at the bidding of God(As per bible).Holy spirits appearance and disappearance is as per wishes of god. Not a single instance in entire Bible about Human beings taking rebirth. That is a Big lie of yours.Are you suggesting Vatican doesn't represent Roman Catholic Church?. Are you this dense? You can argue till eternity quoting some Heretics(lol) but the statements of Jesus regarding eternal punishment are not disputed by Vatican. The Vatican position is " separation from Jesus is a bigger punishment compared to eternal Punishment in hell fire". Btw, "perpetual cycle of material birth and death" is not same as Burning in lake of fire.Many people would like to relive their Lives if there is a chance.I dont think there is anybody who loves to get burned in a lake of fire. That is an issue you have to take up with Main stream christian scholars and see if this argument of yours is accepted. Good Luck.

Two major points here 1)Reincarnation of Humanbeings and 2) Eternal hell 1)Reincarnation:You said in Post 70 That Matt. 16:13-14 and Matt:26:52 make sense if only reincarnation is taken into account.There might be plenty of Biblical quotes which may not make sense at first glance but nobody suggested to use ideas from Hinduism. Later you said in post 75 “people thought that Jesus was a reincarnation of Elijah” and “commonly accepted by people of those days”.This assertion of yours has no biblical support. You have no counter to Hebrews 9:27 that explicitly prohibits reincarnation of human beings. In post 68 you mentioned Exodus 3:13-14 supporting reincarnation but it is meant for god/god(s)/Holy spirits and not for human beings . 2)Coming to “eternal hell” your argument about faulty translation and “main stream Christianity” opinion with regards to “eternal hell” are thoroughly debunked with biblical quotes in post 78 and Vatican’s explanation in post 80 . Your claim that Exod. 21:24-25 which advocates an eye for an eye is similar to law of karma is unsustainable as Karmic law is not Implemented by human beings but they suffer the consequences of their actions(Karma); whereas Exod. 21:24-25 suggests explicit human action of retaliation /reparation.

Load of rubbish Polygamy was the Norm?.Who told you?. The fighting class(kshatriya) have more wives to account for loss of lives in wars.It was not a norm for the general public. Sati was not a prescription to be followed.No where in hindu scriptures Sati was recommended.Early marriage for girls was recommended for different reasons altogether. There are explicit statements in Veda for a widowed women to Get out of grief and get on with her life. Which scriptures? The Abrahamic scriptures?. No where in Hindu scriptures Slavery is supported. Polyandry was explicitly prohibited by scriptures. There are exceptions like Draupadi. There is no scriptural support for devadasi system to begin with. Devadasi is a woman dedicated to a diety in a temple and remains Brahmacharini all her life.The system degraded in to exploitation.The much revered Carnatic music singer M.S Subbalakshmi hails from a family of devadasis. So?

Now this is the easy part.Here is the official position of Vatican. Eternal hell: http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a12.htm Quote 1034 Jesus often speaks of "Gehenna" of "the unquenchable fire" reserved for those who to the end of their lives refuse to believe and be converted, where both soul and body can be lost.614 Jesus solemnly proclaims that he "will send his angels, and they will gather . . . all evil doers, and throw them into the furnace of fire,"615 and that he will pronounce the condemnation: "Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire!"616 1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, "eternal fire. . "617 The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs. Unquote... My comments//The opinion of the Vatican is that separation from god is a bigger punishment than getting burned in The lake of fire Eternally.Vatican, even for a moment doesn’t deny Eternal punishment for those who refuse to believe in Jesus.// The protestants also affirm the idea of eternal punishment in hell. You keep posting somebody's opinion on this matter.Your opinion is neither supported by the official mainstream christian position nor the Bible.So far you haven't quoted anything from bible that supports your ideas.I don't feel particularly happy in pursuing unrealistic ideas:P

We are not talking about beliefs here.This i made it clear several times. The issue you raised is Krishna is same as christ. And i countered that by quoting Jesus wherein he says He is less than his father(Which you agreed). Jesus is dependent on His Father(Old testament God) by his own admission ,while Krishna says He is Independent. This is not about Beliefs of People but about how Jesus and Krishna Describe themselves. If that doesn't settle the matter for you I have nothing further to add. This is again repetition of what i said earlier.I have no opinion On Jesus's divinity or the lack of one. There is no confusion in the statement of Jesus On eternal punishment. Jesus’ statements on Everlasting punishment In hell This is the fate of people who don’t serve his disciples/apostles(Jesus says he sends them..(details in the chapter matthew 25) Matthew 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. This particular statement is clear even in original greek. The word aionios stands for eternal/everlasting. Check the explanation at the bible site: Matthew 25:46 "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life." Conviction has no place here.It is all about how Krishna and Jesus explain about themselfes. The point is Jesus's limitation is set by His father(Matthew 24:36 :But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.) The limitation of Jesus the christ, is applicable even while he is in heaven with Father...End times... The limitations of Krishna on earth is set By krishna himself.Krishna is Bound by his own rules while Jesus is bound by the rules of Father.

That statement of yours is much clearer. Now, that is completely different from what Hinduism teaches.That God has to die for the sins of Humans has no place in hinduism in general or vaishnavism in particular.So, any parallels drawn b/n christianity and hinduism is spurious and invalid. And the most important point i keep mentioning is the Punishment for unbelief, which you try to duck by saying that eternal punishment doesnt exist.That eternal punishment exists for unbeleif is directly evident from jesus sayings. I missed that. But here is another angel that accepts worship.Probably this angel is on a higher plane. Acts 27:23 For there stood by me this night the angel of God, whose I am, and whom I serve. Detailed commentary is available on what it means to serve.Acts 27:23 Last night an angel of the God whose I am and whom I serve stood beside me That is right.Jesus is giving a clear demarcation between him and father. That is the difference b/n Krishna and Christ. Krishna says he is the creator and he knows everything while Jesus makes it clear that he has his own limitations vis-a-vis Father(God). True. You are contradicting your self after a few lines.You agreed that Jesus has limitations(By his own admission) while krishna was explicit that he is not bound by any limitations. Btw, panentheism has no place in mainstream christianity or it's root, Judaism. Melvin changed his opinion.Check his post no 64. No, it indicates that common man's perception about God's prophets/messengers/spirits. The bible in no uncertain terms denies reincarnation. I have nothing more to add.

2:42-43: Men of small knowledge are very much attached to the flowery words of the Vedas, which recommend various fruitive activities for elevation to heavenly planets, resultant good birth, power, and so forth. Being desirous of sense gratification and opulent life, they say that there is nothing more than this. 2:44 In the minds of those who are too attached to sense enjoyment and material opulence, and who are bewildered by such things, the resolute determination for devotional service to the Supreme Lord does not take place. 2:53 When your mind is no longer disturbed by the flowery language of the Vedas, and when it remains fixed in the trance of self-realization, then you will have attained the divine consciousness. The problem is with the person who is bewildered By the flowery language of Vedas.Not the Vedas itself. The same analogy should apply here.

Hebrews 9:27 (King James Version) "And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment." I mistakenly Posted the explanation given. The verse clearly prohibits Reincarnation.With regards to Elijah, john etc they are exceptions if your interpretation that Jesus is reincarnation elijah etc is valid. No reincarnation is mentioned for ordinary Men.

It appears form bible that Angels are also worshipped. Revelation 22:8 And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which showed me these things. No explicit statement from Jesus that he is God(while he was On earth). Jesus was slightly more clear when he says It is Only god who is Good. Mark 10:18:And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. And then Jesus says It is only Father(God) who knows Every thing Matthew 24:36 :But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

The Jewish Scholars say Matthew was reading a faulty Greek Translation of Isaiah 7:14 .According to Them there was no mention of Virgin in Original Hebrew bible. Isaiah 7:14 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Since i have no knowledge of Hebrew i have nothing more to add. Jesus also says man can ask forgiveness for sins of fellow men from god. Matthew 6:14 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: Matthew 6:15: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. He also says in above verses it is easier FOR MEN to forgive sins(of fellow men)

That is Fanatic obsession with the word demigod.As pointed out by Jnd earlier those who comment on serious matters in this forum haven't even read the gita in full. Continuing with the various scarifices(including 4:25) krishna says 4:30 All these performers who know the meaning of sacrifice become cleansed of sinful reactions, and, having tasted the nectar of the results of sacrifices, they advance toward the supreme eternal atmosphere. 31:O best of the Kuru dynasty, without sacrifice one can never live happily on this planet or in this life: what then of the next? 32:All these different types of sacrifice are approved by the Vedas, and all of them are born of different types of work. Knowing them as such, you will become liberated. Knowing them as such, you will become liberated..... and not by condemning them like the theists of the world. For the theists of the world chanting is the only way to reach Lord and everything else is mundane and irrelevant contrary to what Krishna says in Gita.

Here is what i understand from Gita and the iskcon reference given by Mike. Gita 3:34 There are principles to regulate attachment and aversion pertaining to the senses and their objects. One should not come under the control of such attachment and aversion, because they are stumbling blocks on the path of self-realization. (Aversion to sex with wife could also become a stumbling block in self-realization ) Since uncontrollable lust is a stumbling block to self-realization it has to be tamed with intellect(3:40-41). In 3:36 Arjuna asks about the reason for sinful acts and Krishna says in 3:37 that uncontrolled lust is responsible for sinful activities. It doesn't appear(for me) that these verses have any bearing on conjugal relationship b/n husband and his wife.

True. But it is not me who made the comparison and declared Krishna is Christ(jesus).I merely pointed out the Fundamental differences that makes your assertion invalid.Since you have not denied the the basic and fundamental differences i have pointed out we have nothing more to discuss, i believe. As i said before i have no intention to establish the divinity or the lack of it, of Jesus.I was merely responding to your statement in post number 60 about inconsistencies in bible "One testimony may state: "For in him we live, and move, and have our being." (Acts 17:28), yet in another, the same Lord Jesus Christ exclaims: "My God, my God, why didst" Once again i have no problem with beliefs of people as long as they don't hurt others.I am not an evangelist out to convert people. But, when you make a sweeping statement that christ is nothing but Krishna you should back up with an explicit statement from Jesus (while he was alive). The description of hell in Bible(new testament) are graphic and descriptive.We already had this discussion before and the specific quotes from bible are listed at What the Bible Says About Hell | Bible.org. Could be ; but Jesus didn't say anything about reincarnation or suggested anything to that effect. Reincarnation is explicitly denied in Bible(NT) Hebrews 9:27 Everyone has only one life in which to determine their destiny .