Questions From A Young Christian

[Guest Chris_Latta]

Oh Philip philip.. where art thou?

You probably scared him off, but don't worry, I won't leave just yet. I'm making many new friends here.

I could go on, but don't want this to turn into a Christianity vs. Sikhi debate, unless you want it.

I might've accepted that challenge when I was a younger man, but I don't think my blood pressure could tolerate a heated debate such as that since I am semiretired now.

[Heera Singh]

scared him off? how... no threats were made this was a propper mature discussion ... i don't think anything should've scared him off..

[lowest of the low singhni]

vaheguru ji ka khalsa vaheguru ji ki fateh

And Jesus is the only human being who ever lived, who actually never committed a single wrong thing : because He was God become flesh on Earth, He was without sin.

You have no right to say anything of the sort unless you are completely enlightened and have known the minds, hearts and thoughts of every human being who has walked this earth. One Jesus was great, but we have 10 Gurus, and none of them ever sinned either.

I have a question too. What did Jesus do from the time he was born until the time he started preaching and was Baptised? The chapter Matthew isn't very clear. There seems to be a time period missing. Like.. he was born, taken into hiding from Herod and then when he was an adult he started preaching/doing the miracles. What happened in between?

There are a lot of lovely stories about our Gurus and their 'child'hood, and right from that time it was clear from their deeds/words/actions that they were no ordinary babies or children. Take Guru Nanak Dev Ji and the snake, the alphabet, sacred thread, Sacha Sauda.. it goes on.

But there's also the other side of the message : that everyone who refuses to believe in Jesus remains under the wrath of God, and under His judgement. Even if he is ever so nice and loving.

Right, well, Sikhs aren't interested in hell, nor are we interested in your version of Heaven either, so it doesn't really matter if you think we're all eternally damned. Thanks nevertheless. You come to ask us about our faith and then end up saying we're screwed anyway lol.

And God is simply too holy to tolerate only one single sin if His presence, and He is too just to let one single sin, ever so small, unpunished. That's why by human nature all men and womed, me included, are due to Hell as a punishment for their sins. And all the good you can do simply can't help you to please God, because only one single sin is sufficient to be punished.

Correct me if I'm wrong Bhenjis and Veeray, but doesn't Sikhi teach us that even reciting Guru Saheb's Name once with TRUE devotion is enough to propel you into the arms of God?

And God is simply too holy to tolerate only one single sin if His presence

There were many 'sinners' who came to the court of our Gurus and were accepted, loved, educated and forgiven - even when they sinned in the presence of Guru Sahib. You said Jesus and God were the same... then how did Jesus tolerate the sinners he met, if God is too holy to even go near them?

He is too just to let one single sin, ever so small, unpunished

What happened to God's mercy? He is just yes, but everyone makes mistakes and God is also loving and forgiving. On one hand you said that one small sin is enough for huge punishment but on the other you say that after acceptance of Jesus' sacrifice you don't need to be punished at all?

And all the good you can do simply can't help you to please God, because only one single sin is sufficient to be punished.

Poor you : ( I feel sorry for you. One single sin is enough to be punished but one good deed doesn't even help to turn that fate around.

ਸਿਮਰਤ ਇਕ ਬਾਰ ਹਰਿ ਹਰਿ ਮਿਟਿ ਕੋਟਿ ਕਸਮਲ ਜਾਂਤਿ ॥੨॥

Meditating in remembrance on the Lord, Har, Har, even once, millions of sins are erased. ||2||

http://www.sikhitothemax.com/page.asp?ShabadID=4720

vaheguru ji ka khalsa vaheguru ji ki fateh

[Guest peacemaker]

Why are you arguing over the beliefs of Christianity, Lowest? Those are his beliefs and he is entitled to them. We have no right to pick them apart like that. I'm sure he could also nitpick many of the things that Sikhs believe in till he is blue in the face. You're just mentioning the things that make Sikhs and Christians two totally different "religions". You're obviously not going to agree with a lot of what he is saying. I personally believe that as long as you love your religion and don't force it on others, then there is nothing wrong with expressing it.

Live and let live. Fighting is pointless, especially since Christians have been thinking that way for over 2,000 years. Phillip is in a new surrounding, so he is only telling us what he knows. If you don't like it, that's fine, but for our only God's sake, don't make the guy feel like he is following the wrong path. Finally, Sikh means learner. I'm interested in knowing about everything, so please don't say we aren't interested in knowing about "your" version of "heaven". I might not agree, but I'm just saying you don't speak for all the Sikhs when you say that.

[Singhballer]

:rolleyes:

[Bundha]

I hope I am not knitpicking, but there are certain things that trouble me.

We all know that the version of the bible we see now was formulated a few 100 YEARS after Jesus, at the council of Nicea. It was mortal men with their own agendas and political leanings and prejedices that formed the final version.

They left out the gospal of Mary, the gospal of Judus and others. They changed/altered many things to bring the bible in line with their thinking. Jeus had said - seek the temple of God for it is within you, this was changed by the church to stamp its own authority. Before Nicea, christians believed in reincarnation, for Jesus said that the soul merges into God, again this was outlawed as heritical and punishment of death. In one gospal it says that on Jesus's final day the cock crowed thrice, in another it says once, why the discrepencies?

I asked a question earlier : A child is born it breaths once and dies.

How can Christianity explain this? Did the child have a chance to accpet Jesus? If it did not then what was its purpose? If as the Christians beleive that you are born once and either you spend eternity in Heaven or an eternity in hell, then why was it born? Even today any child which is born and dies without accepting Jesus is said to go to hell, and now the church is thinking of changing this because it sits uncomfortably with todays way of thinking. If values and laws are changed because of convenience then WHERE IS THE TRUTH ?

sorry if I have cuased offence.

[Philip777]

I'm back !

And no you've not scared me off at all, I just don't come on this forum so very often. I didn't read anything that offended me.

And I don't see the use either of a hot debate here.

I also don't see why you should not be supposed to make me think I'm wrong. I've said since the beginning that if one day I am convinced that what I believe isn't true, I'm ready to change my mind and to let go everything I believe, from one instant to the other.

[Heera Singh]

^^ welcome back.. good to see that you're open to mature discussion

and peacemaker... nobody is making any sort of attacks... he's made comments.. and we're responding to those comments.. and vice versa... this is a discussion, not a debate on who's path is better.

[Guest peacemaker]

and peacemaker... nobody is making any sort of attacks... he's made comments.. and we're responding to those comments.. and vice versa... this is a discussion, not a debate on who's path is better.

Perhaps I perceived it the wrong way, but I just didn't like the delivery of the "response".

[Philip777]

I hope I am not knitpicking, but there are certain things that trouble me.

We all know that the version of the bible we see now was formulated a few 100 YEARS after Jesus, at the council of Nicea. It was mortal men with their own agendas and political leanings and prejedices that formed the final version.

They left out the gospal of Mary, the gospal of Judus and others. They changed/altered many things to bring the bible in line with their thinking. Jeus had said - seek the temple of God for it is within you, this was changed by the church to stamp its own authority. Before Nicea, christians believed in reincarnation, for Jesus said that the soul merges into God, again this was outlawed as heritical and punishment of death. In one gospal it says that on Jesus's final day the cock crowed thrice, in another it says once, why the discrepencies?

I asked a question earlier : A child is born it breaths once and dies.

How can Christianity explain this? Did the child have a chance to accpet Jesus? If it did not then what was its purpose? If as the Christians beleive that you are born once and either you spend eternity in Heaven or an eternity in hell, then why was it born? Even today any child which is born and dies without accepting Jesus is said to go to hell, and now the church is thinking of changing this because it sits uncomfortably with todays way of thinking. If values and laws are changed because of convenience then WHERE IS THE TRUTH ?

sorry if I have cuased offence.

First, the Nicea council was years 300 after Christ, not 100 . But you're right, the final Canon of the Scriptures which are accepted in the Bible, was fixed 100 years after Christ (but not at Nicea). It was in the year 125, and the accepted Scriptures'names were written on a list called the "Muratori list" (don't ask me where the name comes from). And you're right, of 74 known "gospels" (+ probably several ones that have never been discovered) only four were taken. Why ? Because it was easy for anyone to right a gospel, and put all sorts of things in Jesus'mouth. That's why only the gospels that were written by people who either had known Jesus on Earth (Matthex, Mark and John) or who were close to the apostles (Luke) were accepted, and also only those who concorded with the teachings of the apostles. The apostles were seen as the only real authority, not because they were better men than others, they were just as much sinners as you and me are, but because they had known Jesus on Earth.

At Nicea, the first official statements about the Christian faith were fixed. The reason for this was that by the time Christianity had become the official religion of the Empire. But in fact, it only officialized what had always been believed by Christians. Of course, there have always been heresies, false teachings... but the good thing about false teachings is that as they are false, they don't make any difference to real believers (although they can lead others astray). How can we reckognize such false teachings ? By comparing them with the Bible. The Bible is the only real authority for the Christian faith.

One Gospel says the cock crowed once, the other one three times... well, if id crows three times it has also crowed once, hasn't it ? If I say I have written a message on this forum today, it doesn't mean it's the only message I have written.

For the baby that breathes once and dies : the Bible doesn't give a clear answer for this case, so I can only say I don't know. I can tell you what I think, but as I'm not God, I might be mistaken : I think a baby that dies has not yet sinned, so it has nothing that disearves a punishment.

And what do you mean by "the Church" that thinks one way or another. What authority has the Church to decide about that ? Which Church, to begin with ? The Vatican ? First it has been at the head of so many massacres in history that it has long lost his credibility, and second real Christians reckognize no human authority : only the Bible, the Word of God. And the Bible doesn't give the answer to this question. So the Christians can only say we don't know, but God knows and he is just.

And no, you didn't cause me any offense at all.