Jesus never sinned?Is it true?

[Guest guest]

There are many angles to look at a incident and say whether its sin or not.So one who is a good man in one society is a sinner in another society.For example Gandhi was a great man in Indian society.But according to British he was a criminal.So they jailed him for years.Nelosn madela was a freedom fighter for south africans.But again he was in jail for 27 years.There is nobody till date who has ever been sinfree according to laws of all societies.Similiarly there isnt one who is sinful according to all societies.

 

If we view jesus, he is sinfree according to christian society.But some societies view some of his acts as sinful.

 

For example

 

1.Jesus serving fish to his followers--sin according to hindus,buddhists and jains.These societies view eating or serving meat as equilant to murder.

 

2.Jesus chasing away traders who were doing business in the temple--sinful according to christianity itself.Because if one slaps you,you have to show him your other cheek.If one makes you walk a mile,you should walk two miles.

 

And also this is illegal. The normal course of a citizen is to complain about such misuse of temple to the authorities.Nobody can take law in their hands.So is that not a sin according to current day laws and laws of those days?

 

3. Jesus drinking wine.This is sinful in islam,hinduism and even according to many other societies.Wine spoils health and is a high sin.There are many philosophers who have condemned alcohol.many countries have banned alcohol totally.So is that not a sin?

 

These things might not be sin in christianity.But are sins in other societies.Similiarly what you call as sin in other societies is legal according to their law and god. So it all depends on how you look it.

[Guest guest]

1.Jesus serving fish to his followers--sin according to hindus,buddhists and jains.These societies view eating or serving meat as equilant to murder

--jesus was not serving real fishes, but the thousands he created by miracle. Many versions of the gospel speak only of bread and not of fishes.

 

2.Jesus chasing away traders who were doing business in the temple--sinful according to christianity itself.Because if one slaps you,you have to show him your other cheek.If one makes you walk a mile,you should walk two miles

---no... in christianity self defense or the defense of others is admitted without problem. Jesus was not reacting to against violence made to himself, but against a violence made to the sacred pilgrimage place. So he was acting in a spiritual akarmic way..

 

3. Jesus drinking wine.This is sinful in islam,hinduism and even according to many other societies.Wine spoils health and is a high sin.There are many philosophers who have condemned alcohol.many countries have banned alcohol totally.So is that not a sin?

---it is demonstrated that he was not drinking wine but simply grape juice. From the translation of the gospels and from the customs of the religious people who gave the hall of the last supper. This group was a sect of hebraism who was also vegetarian.

 

These things might not be sin in christianity.But are sins in other societies.Similiarly what you call as sin in other societies is legal according to their law and god. So it all depends on how you look it.

--your attempt to demonstrate that all is good or bad according simply to our will and taste (=mayavadism) is not successiful. Saint persons and god's manifestations are sometimes "sinful" only if we are very superficial in our judgement.. actually they are'nt

 

we are surely sinful if we try to criticize the life of these exalted personalities and if we preach that all is illusion

[Guest guest]

please refer to john 21 in bible where jesus blesses his disciples to catch more fish and simon gets a net load of fish.

 

also jesus tells his disciples in john 21,12- after they catch a net load of fish(153 fish actually) he tells his disciples "come and eat"

 

and if u have any verse stating that jesus did not drink intixicating wine please show it.Also jesus; dsiciples ate fish as its is shown in john 21,12

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna!

 

AGTSP!

 

Interesting!!!....but you go any further......please...DEFINE SIN...according to you!!!

 

Haribol!

 

anand

[Guest guest]

if you are like jesus you can eat fishes and if you are like shiva you can drink oceans of poison

 

your attempt to demonstrate that everything is sin and nothing is sin (mayavadism) makes all the discussion useless

 

you have no genuine interest

 

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna,

 

 

please refer to john 21 in bible where jesus blesses his disciples to catch more fish and simon gets a net load of fish.

 

also jesus tells his disciples in john 21,12- after they catch a net load of fish(153 fish actually) he tells his disciples "come and eat"

 

and if u have any verse stating that jesus did not drink intixicating wine please show it.Also jesus; dsiciples ate fish as its is shown in john 21,12

 

 

This is a very good point. Killing other beings and eating them, ie increasing our flesh by another being's flesh, is a sin no matter who does it. Anybody who is aiding or asking someone to commit such snful acts is even more sinful.

 

In this case jc seems to have done that. and a christian's claim that jc is sinless is thereby completely wrong. Even jc himself asks his disciple not to call him good and only that GOD is good, means he considers himself sinful.

 

So next time any crack pot christian missionary comes to your door you can throw a few eggs in his face.

[Guest guest]

---if you are like jesus you can eat fishes and if you are like shiva you can drink oceans of poison

 

Is drinking poison and eating fish same?eating Fish is killing other living beings.But shiva drunk pison to save others.How are both the same?

 

 

[Guest guest]

again... be like jesus and you can do like you want with fishes..

 

be like krsna and you can cut heads like he did with sisupala

 

be like arjuna and you can kill millions of people like he did in kuruksetra

 

be like kalki and kill all the human kind at the end of kali yuga

 

be like shiva and you're authorized to annihilate all the universe when it is the right moment

 

and i can go on...

 

the discussion abut the fact that saint persons or god's manifestations can sometime do apparently immoral things is to be done more competently and creatively

 

and i know that your purpose is not to do it, to have pleasure from the infinite variety of divinity, but to destroy all reverence to god and saints of any religion

 

[Guest guest]

Krishna killing sisubala is immoral???

 

Kalki destroying criminals is immoral?

 

arjuna killing people who insulted his wife in public is immoral?

 

shiva giving moksha to all living beings by annihilating them is immoral?

 

Dont blasphemise.

[maadhav 0]

why we should care?

why waste time discussing this?

 

we hindus need to care if we sin or not per gita.

hinduism encourges one to live as much sin-free as one wants to be sin-free.

 

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna,

 

 

again... be like jesus and you can do like you want with fishes..

 

be like krsna and you can cut heads like he did with sisupala

 

 

 

Sisupala is Kumbakarna reborn. He tried to marry Rukmini(Lakshmi Devi). This is a very great sin. His sin reached the high point when he was deriding Lord Krishna Himself. So he was killed by the Lord.

 

This is not similar to Lord Shiva's act of drinking poison or Lord Krishna's act of killing sisupala. These demons were destroyed to save devatas and humanity. So this has a purpose of sishta paripalana and dushta nigraha. When devatas or Bhagavan does some acts like killing, it is for the above purpose. Not because Devatas or Bhagavan likes to do it with no purpose.

 

Arjuna also killed his enemies not for his gains or with no purpose, but for establishing dharma.

 

Krishna is Bhagavan. So HIS acts are beyond question as it always confirms to DHARMA.

 

For the rest of the devatas, the standard is the motive. Does it establish dharma ?

 

What is the purpose of killing the fishes in case of jesus. Simple, he wanted to give food to his disciples. If he can really perform miracle he should have simply fed them magically all through their lives, say bread, without killing innocent creatures and making it undergo pain.

 

This act of jc is very sinful.

 

Killing any animal for food is plain sinful and wrong. I do not see any DHARMA here but only ADHARMA.

[Guest guest]

madhavji,

 

we are being attacked by all religions.These are some points for counter attack by our religion.

[Guest guest]

"Krishna killing sisubala is immoral???

Kalki destroying criminals is immoral?

arjuna killing people who insulted his wife in public is immoral?

shiva giving moksha to all living beings by annihilating them is immoral?

Dont blasphemise. "

 

i do not blasphemize... you do not understand or you do not want to understand

 

i simply advice you to not treat god's or saint's activities like they were the common man's ones... If you do respect the activities of sri krsna bhagavan you have also to respect his messengers all over the world or you blaspheme then and him!!

 

(but you already blaspheme krsna being a mayavadi, so what you want?)

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

god?who accepted non-hindu prophets as gods and gods messengers?I did not.Do you asuume so?If yes,then i pity you.God wont send jihadis as prophets and wont send messengers who eat meat and fish.

 

why cannot i compare gods activities with that of a common man's?Only by doing so i can realize how a common man should behave.which act of god is sin according to the morals of common man?explain.

 

If i call krishna as a mayawathi is that blasphemising?Its a great method of worshiping him.how is worshiping blasphemising?

[Guest guest]

who accepted non-hindu prophets as gods and gods messengers?

--you have to simply see attentively the features of a spiritualist or a master. Bhagavad Gita requires it, not that you ask passport.

 

why cannot i compare gods activities with that of a common man's?

--because the comparison is useless.. motivations are different so the acts have different significance. When krsna kills he's most mercyful, when a common human kills he's demoniac

 

Only by doing so i can realize how a common man should behave.which act of god is sin according to the morals of common man?explain.

--that's word jugglery as usual by yourself. The man has to follow god, not to imitate.. God does not always show a behaviour similar to humans. You want to imitate freely being illuded that you are god..

 

If i call krishna as a mayawathi is that blasphemising?

--krsna is isvara of maya, not a preacher that all is maya, him included.

A mayavadi saying that krsna is not supreme is actually blaspheming, not worshipping

 

you are not serious in your spiritual research, you're able to do only useless criticism.

 

[Guest guest]

--you have to simply see attentively the features of a spiritualist or a master. Bhagavad Gita requires it, not that you ask passport

geetha asked you to eat fish and kill infidels?great

 

--because the comparison is useless.. motivations are different so the acts have different significance. When krsna kills he's most mercyful, when a common human kills he's demoniac

 

motivation is same-save dharma

 

---The man has to follow god, not to imitate.

how can you follow without imitating?great fun this is.,

 

---A mayavadi saying that krsna is not supreme is actually blaspheming, not worshipping

is it so?

 

[Guest guest]

--you have to simply see attentively the features of a spiritualist or a master. Bhagavad Gita requires it, not that you ask passport

geetha asked you to eat fish and kill infidels?great

••if you obstinately reduce jesus christ as a fish eater it is manifest that you do not want really know about him but you are here to try to destroy the general concept of religion and propagandize mayavada. You started trying to demonstrate that sin's concept is relative.. so do not pose as a bhagavad gita defender.

 

--because the comparison is useless.. motivations are different so the acts have different significance. When krsna kills he's most mercyful, when a common human kills he's demoniac

motivation is same-save dharma

••every killer or murderer in this world is saving dharma?

 

---The man has to follow god, not to imitate.

how can you follow without imitating?great fun this is.,

••so if this is the way to learn by god, imitate avatara's lilas, making miracles, saving the earth, coming out from a pillar, killing ten headed demons, making a hole in the cover of universe with your foot and making the ganga flow, lift govardan hill and so on..imitate this please

 

---A mayavadi saying that krsna is not supreme is actually blaspheming, not worshipping

is it so?

••yes it is

 

[Guest guest]

••if you obstinately reduce jesus christ as a fish eater it is manifest that you do not want really know about him but you are here to try to destroy the general concept of religion and propagandize mayavada. You started trying to demonstrate that sin's concept is relative.. so do not pose as a bhagavad gita defender

 

wasnt he a fish eater?And anyway you were the one who said fish eaters and meat eaters were messengers of krishna.Atleast I am defending geetha.But you are destroying the concept of geetha by defending fish eating and meat eating.

 

••every killer or murderer in this world is saving dharma?

I spoke about motivation for god killing demons.Is it not for saving dharma?

 

••so if this is the way to learn by god, imitate avatara's lilas, making miracles, saving the earth, coming out from a pillar, killing ten headed demons, making a hole in the cover of universe with your foot and making the ganga flow, lift govardan hill and so on..imitate this please

Once i get advaitha moksha i too will become god.Then i can imitate all this.

 

••yes it is

prove

[Guest guest]

"Once i get advaitha moksha i too will become god.Then i can imitate all this."

 

so wait 'til that moment, do it, and your words will be truth.. now you are speaking of fantasies..

 

that's your purpose, not promoting vedic tradition as better of semitic tradition, but simply blaspheming all divine personalities, included the vedic ones, to put yourself at their place

 

god is intelligent... so i doubt that you are god

[Guest guest]

---so wait 'til that moment, do it, and your words will be truth.. now you are speaking of fantasies..

"learn to dream" said abdul kalam.Im following him

 

---"god is intelligent... so i doubt that you are god "

 

If i become god i too will become intelligent

[Guest guest]

I find a lot of truth in the original post.

 

1. For a muslim, killing an animal for food is not sin.

2. For a Kshatriya, killing the enemy to protect dharma is not sin.

3. For gods, playing with the lives of human beings is not sin.

4. For an atheist, blashphemising the god is not a Sin.

 

And I find a lot of people getting scared at the mere hint of advaita.... may be it gives them night mares...

[Guest guest]

"Sin is relative. "

 

no one of us live his everyday life following this principle, everyone discriminates every second between good and bad.... so to preach only teorethical philosophies is useless

 

advaita is a real nightmare for the ones who has decided to believe it blindly.. and blindly is the only way to be an advaitin

[Guest guest]

Even in day to day down to earth mundane things like eating food views sin relatively.

And if as you say everyone discriminates between good and bad, why would not everybody choose the ones that is good to everybody else?

Truth, SIn, Dharma everything is relative only. And everything conceived by man is woth reference to something else, which makes it relative.

 

So think about it.

 

[Guest guest]

you never live in a relative way even taking food, you are precise in choosing what is good and rejecting what's bad..

 

intellectually you can observe that the taste is relative, but you are personal, absolute and discriminative when the food comes to the tongue.. like or dislike, no other considerations

 

and the fact that all over the world they like the food that you reject means nothing.. you simply do not like and you do not eat..

 

so relativity, especially for common humans, is an hypochrisy and to preach that the good and bad is the same is simply sinful and useless

 

if you were coherent in your behaviour with the relativity principle, you never answered and criticized my message. if you are here discussing in a forum it is manifest that you discriminate between right opinions and wrong opinions... and you have answered because you have judged wrong my opinion

 

 

[Guest guest]

Relativity comes, when the thing that is right for us is not right for others.

 

Do you see the point.

 

YOu may make personal choices, but they are all relative.

 

And as you mature, even the perception of truth changes.