The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum #5
=> Re: The Bloody Gospel
| Re: The Bloody Gospel |
|
Posted by
AssyrianMuslim
(Guest)
- Friday, May 23 2008, 7:23:35 (CEST) from 75.219.224.96 - 96.sub-75-219-224.myvzw.com  Commercial -  Windows Codename Longhorn -  Internet ExplorerWebsite: Website title: |
Brother Pancho, if the individual would have read the entire chapter he would have seen what he was talking about when he said "reborn" or "born again". If we read the entire chapter in full context, we'll see the obvious point behind "born again". This is nothing special, secretive or "symbolic" but it is understood to be when an adult person decides to basically transform his life to live according to the will of God, such person is becoming "reborn". We have that in Islam which is at the time a person makes his Shahadah(accepts Islam by professing the shahadah) a person is becoming "reborn" because all his past is erased. He is like a "new born" again without any sins. From that point, a person will strive to live a pious life day by day. It is an every day struggle which a person becomes better as time passes. That is the whole point behind that "reborn" thing. But the Christian cults such as those "born again" Christians are as always taking things in to their own hands. In one place they say everyone is born a "sinner" since infancy yet Jesus is recorded as saying unless a person is "reborn" which is obviously because an infant is clean, pure and innocent. That is not the case with Christians because they believe even a freaking baby is a sinner since birth. So this Jesus was speaking "symbolic" here and was "literal" there is bullshit, unfair and false on behalf of these Christians. Whenever they are embarrassed by something in their scripture, they try to reinterpret it. We never said that we believe this to have come out of the mouth of Jesus but it is in the New Testament and Christians believe it be the word of God. There is no need to go out of the way to try to sudden;y change the meaning of it. The bottom line is that it is in 3 of the 4 gospels in the New Testament, it is a church doctrine and this is a universal Christian belief. Minime is the first one today I know of that is denying it and even he knows it to be as true as the world being round but he is intentionally denying it. That is why we see the outrage like "oh my religion is better" when that was never the subject. These are just common distraction they throw at us. This is common among our nationals and at times among Christians in general to twist and even lie against their own religion in order to prove someone wrong even though the person is telling the truth. I remember I said something once and this angry Christian said that "this is not true" so I said he must be from a unique denomination so I asked him what particular church he goes to or which doctrine he follows, he answered by saying "I am not telling you" so I told him "of course not because you know you are foul" that's why. There is nothing symbolic about the "eucharist" except that to me and Pancho it is just bread and wine while the Christians would be offended by saying that since they believe it to be the flesh and blood of "Christ". This is old Christian doctrine and anyone who rejects it is going against the church. --------------------- |
The full topic:
|
|
Content-length: 3349 Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded Accept: image/gif, image/x-xbitmap, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, application/x-ms-application, application/vnd.ms-xpsdocument, appli... Accept-encoding: gzip, deflate Accept-language: en-us Cache-control: no-cache Connection: Keep-Alive Cookie: *hidded* Host: www.insideassyria.com Referer: http://www.insideassyria.com/rkvsf5/rkvsf_core.php?Re_The_Bloody_Gospel-NYgn.HzuV.REPLY Ua-cpu: x86 User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506) |
Powered by RedKernel V.S. Forum 1.2.b9