Roman Catholic and protestant

last SG · 2005-05-15T18:02:37+00:00

and if saying that by being a protestant, you will be safe is not blatant bullshit than what is it?a fact?

stupidissmart SG

Huh .. who are the non-sinners?

If u do not sin u can go to heaven too isn't it ? But strangely no one can be sinless. It is not even possible . Tat is why I say it is like dirty politics where it was proclaim loudly but in truth it doesn't make any difference.

Yes .. the price had to be paid .. and it was paid .. by Jesus on the cross It is free as you are not the one paying.

My first understanding of your statement is u need to fulfil certain criteria before being able to go to salvation such as perform less sin or love everyone, which is something tat take considerable effort and not easy to do. U r still paying the toll and tis is not free. Rolling Eyes (There is again the issue of being a christian is itself not free but lets talk about the point above first)

The concept of Free Gift is that the recipient need not PAY for the gift. Whether someone else pays for it or not is really not the issue to the recipient, but fact is, someone else did.

Well tat come to a question whether is labour consider to be paying for the gift. Some pay for the "gift" but expect u to perform certain actions over times. Is it still free ? (as in above point)

stupidissmart SG

People do not come to you just because you are 'good'. As Christians we are supposed to love, not just being good.

Non-believers who are sincere to find out about the faith:
1. Are first drawn to the 'good' life.
2. They realize that goodness comes out of love.

That is what I meant by people will naturally come to you if you actually live out the faith.

Actually, my personal opinion is monks in buddhism seem to be performing much good to society as well. We can't really say tat their goodness do not come from loves while christian who lead a "good" life definitely comes from love. For me, a religion asking people to do good deeds doesn't means it is right.... Who knows maybe a cult tat worship devil like people r the right one (meaning there really is a devil like deity and events happened as described by them)

Chin Eng SG

Mr. Green actually you are quite right. Christians do not have the monopoly of good works, and personally, I'd respect Rev Sek Ming Yi (hope I spelt the name right) more in NKF doing dangerous stunts than any Christian evangelist in Singapore where good works is concern.
Having said that Christian is not only about good works. The concept of Christianity is salvation by faith (which of course you may disagree Mr. Green ), but that is THE crux of Christianity, not the good works. I have seen many examples personally that some "good works" done by Christian groups or organisation stems from the purpose of wanting to evangelise, so personally, to me, there is an secondary motive hidden (which I don't agree with).

Chin Eng SG

Actually where theology is concern, there are a few avenues of thoughts over what is the true concept of salvation, and does good work play a part in it?

I believe in RCs theology, good work is an integral part of salvation, while most protestants will state that the only one thing that one need to do is to RECEIVE salvation by accepting Christ as their personal saviour. Good work is not part of the equation. So under this concept, receive something can hardly be considered as "performing certain actions over times". No different from stretching out one's hand when you buy something from a shop and getting a gift in the process, or even going to a place to redeem some free things which may even involving paying a bus fare or taxi charge to go to. So would you still consider the so-called gift as free? Mr. Green

laurence82 SG

Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act

PART III
RESTRAINING ORDERS

Restraining orders against officials or members of religious group or institution
8. (1) The Minister may make a restraining order against any priest, monk, pastor, imam, elder, office-bearer or any other person who is in a position of authority in any religious group or institution or any member thereof for the purposes specified in subsection (2) where the Minister is satisfied that that person has committed or is attempting to commit any of the following acts:

(a) causing feelings of enmity, hatred, ill-will or hostility between different religious groups;

(b) carrying out activities to promote a political cause, or a cause of any political party while, or under the guise of, propagating or practising any religious belief;

(c) carrying out subversive activities under the guise of propagating or practising any religious belief; or

(d) exciting disaffection against the President or the Government while, or under the guise of, propagating or practising any religious belief.

(2) An order made under subsection (1) may be made against the person named therein for the following purposes:

(a) restraining him from addressing orally or in writing any congregation, parish or group of worshippers or members of any religious group or institution on any subject, topic or theme as may be specified in the order without the prior permission of the Minister;

(b) restraining him from printing, publishing, editing, distributing or in any way assisting or contributing to any publication produced by any religious group without the prior permission of the Minister;

(c) restraining him from holding office in an editorial board or a committee of a publication of any religious group without the prior permission of the Minister.

(3) Any order made under this section shall be for such period, not exceeding 2 years, as may be specified therein.

(4) Before making an order under this section, the Minister shall give the person against whom the order is proposed to be made and the head or governing body or committee of management of the religious group or institution which is to be named in the proposed order, notice of his intention to make the order together with the grounds and allegations of fact in support thereof and of their right to make written representations to the Minister.

(5) The Minister shall have regard to such representations in making the order.

(6) All written representations under subsection (4) must be made within 14 days of the date of the notice of the Ministers intention to make an order under this section.

Restraining orders against other persons
9. (1) Where the Minister is satisfied that

(a) any person is inciting, instigating or encouraging any religious group or religious institution or any person mentioned in subsection (1) of section 8 to commit any of the acts specified in that subsection;

(b) any person, other than persons mentioned in subsection (1) of section 8, has committed or is attempting to commit any of the acts specified in paragraph (a) of that subsection,

he may make a restraining order against him.

(2) Without affecting the generality of subsection (1), an order made under this section may restrain the person named therein from addressing or advising any religious group or religious institution or any member thereof or making any statement or causing any statement to be made, whether orally or in writing, concerning or affecting the relations between that religious group or religious institution and the Government or any other religious group or religious institution.

laurence82 SG

Restraining order isnt enough.

I personally felt people who flout such rules should be jailed, if the offence and actions are serious enough.

stupidissmart SG

I have seen many examples personally that some "good works" done by Christian groups or organisation stems from the purpose of wanting to evangelise, so personally, to me, there is an secondary motive hidden (which I don't agree with).

From the reply from plo30360, it do give me the idea tat one of the reason why christians r performing good deeds maybe is to evangelise to the people.

If just accepting christ as a saviour will guarantee salvation, then I guess these people r free to commit any sins they want as long as they repent, they do not have to do good deeds and god will just let them through as long as he is obedient to him. The deeds u do doesn't matter. Then it is really true to them tat a christian hitler can go to heaven while a mother teresa like buddhist will go to hell. Hell is just a place where he dump the people tat do not... well... carry his... never mind... Mr. Green If tat is the case, personal opinion is tis god is not really the god which was perfect as describe and we should not fear them some line from the kingdom of heaven

So under this concept, receive something can hardly be considered as "performing certain actions over times". No different from stretching out one's hand when you buy something from a shop and getting a gift in the process, or even going to a place to redeem some free things which may even involving paying a bus fare or taxi charge to go to. So would you still consider the so-called gift as free?

Well, then it boils down to the question on whether does believing in christ considered an action or not. Mr. Green If u have to help a person carry a burden, like a bag of luggage, maybe for life, is it a labour ?

Chin Eng SG

actually, as I had said too, there will be some who does this, and it is something that I do not agree on.

This really is the trick, true acceptance is suppose to bring a change in one's character, hence there shouldn't be a "Christian Hitler". I don't think Mom Theresa is a Buddhist 'cos she's from a Catholic order of nuns. I don't want to go into a RC/Protestant debate, but I am quite sure the Lord smiles on her.
Acceptance is not a verbal agreement but a life changing experience, but because we will be dealing with abstracts here, it becomes very difficult to judge. I guess the only way is to interact with some Christians and seeing how they operate will show who's the real deal and who's not.

Well, by most definitions, a belief is not considered an action per se, but more of a thought. Wherein "Action" is usually seen to be physical in nature. But I really do not wish to split hairs on this, but there IS a difference between a thought (mental) and action (physical). Mr. Green

Icemoon SG

You fail to consider the power of the Holy Ghost. Ok, I mean you fail to consider the regeneration aspects of salvation. You always think salvation like humans exploiting the law. Like a hacker unrepentant 'cos he thinks by migrating to a country where cybercrime law is lax, the govt cannot prosecute him. Also something like a double jeopardy card, ie. you cannot be prosecuted twice for substanially the same crime.

Like Chin Eng, I don't think a Christian Hitler can exist. Don't leave out regeneration in the equation.

Actually many christians are doing exactly the opposite SIS is describing. They are trying very hard, in fact too hard, to be "on the ball". They are actively conscious of any sinful actions. They make sure they don't break the 10 commandments. See chio bu must recite "thou shall not commit adultery" Mr. Green

The result - they fall back on laws.

GrimR SG

May I know what denomination of christian is City Harvest?? I’ve been wondering abt it for some time.

plo30360 SG

My reply was not to show that evengelization only occurs by good deeds or to show that only Christians perfom good deeds out of love.

Neither do I agree with groups that do 'good' works for the motive of converting people. You live out the faith because that is what you are supposed to do and if by that process you mange to become a witness for Christ than good. Otherwise the group should just have one motive and that is to help people.

I was trying to state that a lot of people who 'preach' the faith(regardless of religion, though Christians are more agressive) don't actually live it out. They are only interested in how many people they can baptize. Kind of like selling flag day coupons.

So by all means preach but make sure you'r living out the faith.

Now about good deeds just to evengelize, is a bit off. In the first place we love(good is not suffcient) not just because we want to show people how 'good' we've become after 'embracing' the Christian faith but because that is the essence of faith :to love. Following that instruction we love(or doing 'good') for the sake of loving and not primarily because we want to evengelize people.

plo30360 SG

They consider themselves to be non-denominational.

off-topic: How many Christians here even consider themselves to be part of a denomination?

stupidissmart SG

I need to clarify the terms of a buddhist "mother teresa" is a person who performs good deeds like mother teresa, only her belief is buddhism. I use to use the term mother teresa but it still basically deals with the bible and is not a good example.

About the appearence of "christian hitler", IMO it can happen. Basically because the same bible, when read by the different people, can come out with different interpretations. Tat is why there are many denomination of christainity. A normal person, after believing in god may turn out to change for the worse, becoming more violent and use more force simply because the bible depict god using much force, violence and elimination to solve its problems and deal with disagreement.

From my perception, thinking or thoughts do take out considerably effort and in fact r really getting paid for it. The value of a programmer is not on its typing skills but understanding of problem, syntex, problem formulation and solution. It is mainly "thoughts" tat rationalise its high pay. In fact most jobs value "mental activity" higher than physical ones. A mental action is work and labour.

Actually when people comes out with laws, there r a group of people who come out with some examples to check and see if there r any loopholes to the system. I am not saying people should look out for loopholes, I am saying tat the system can punish/reward people unfairly due to the system loopholes.

Actually many christians are doing exactly the opposite SIS is describing

Tat really depend on wat u believe in. If the person views good deeds and sinless is important, he willbe on the ball. If a person view just accepting christ as the only criteria, u can see him more free to perform bad deeds. There r even some fanatic who views god actions of violence as the right actions and use it on his daily life. Tat is why when Eng Chin says some people just believe accepting christ as salvation is good enough, believing solely can wash all sins, then they really do believe in unfairness and they probably do much "sins"

Chin Eng SG

Originally posted by stupidissmart:

Tat really depend on wat u believe in. If the person views good deeds and sinless is important, he willbe on the ball. If a person view just accepting christ as the only criteria, u can see him more free to perform bad deeds. There r even some fanatic who views god actions of violence as the right actions and use it on his daily life. Tat is why when Eng Chin says some people just believe accepting christ as salvation is good enough, believing solely can wash all sins, then they really do believe in unfairness and they probably do much "sins"

after all these while you got my nick WRONG???? Confused so disappointed.... Mr. Green

Icemoon SG

Laughing

Chin Eng SG

I consider myself firstly a Christian and secondly a Methodist because I am in a Methodist church.

ccck SG

many ppl out there ask y Christians evangelise. firstly its not something tt Christians can choose to do. it is a responsibility and a mantle handed down to us by Jesus. Let there b no mistake about this for it is written in Bible "make disciples of all the nations." John 15 sums up the entire relationship of Christians and God. God called us to be His disciples, not His converts. To b a disciple in Christ is to live as Jesus did and to bear fruit 4 Him and thru Him and this is done thru evangelising, ministering, nurturing, fellowship in the body of Christ, prayer, the Word of God(The Bible) and with Christ in the centre of our lives.
As a Christian, u can hv only one Master - God. u cannot hv one foot in the world n another in God. U either love one n despise the other.

stupidissmart SG

Since evangelising is probably to a non-believer, I can tell u frankly they don't really care whether it is your responsibility or wat the bible teaches. They plainly find some of the evangelists too pressing and insistent and some, even insulting and they don't like it. Jesus also tell people to hit their slaves if they r lazy. How many people keep slaves, or even hit them now ? God also says through Moses tat those women, after having their period, have to let go of 2 pigeons because they r "unclean". Do anyone follow tat now ? It is to show tat u can quote me tat the bible tell u to do so, but I can also tells of many things which u r not doing too. In todays time, tis rule should undergo some form of revision (such as when to evangelise)[My opinion is evangelise only when they r gonna commit suicide r suffering great depression Mr. Green ] to be more applicable in todays time. Tis is especially so since there r many religions, most peopel already know wat is christainity and nobody can surely know which is right or wrong.

ccck SG

the things u mentioned tt the Jews used to do was the old covenant. the new covenant is justification thru faith n freedom from keeping the laws of the old covenant ie the examples u listed. Jesus however did not say tt we're free frm the law entirely. He gives us two laws

1. Love the Lord your God with all of your heart, with all of your soul, with all of your mind, with all of your strength.
2.Love your neighbour as yourself.

if u study these 2 laws n apply them to our lives, u find tt they reflect the ten commandments. n this is true. Jesus's Cruxifiction freed us frm the old covenant of which only the high priest cld ask God for forgiveness. in dying for the world, all believers have become His priests. The Bible also stated countless times tt Jesus will return like a thief; sneakily n without warning. to put it simply, He will come when u least expect it. n so when's the next disaster? when's the next calamity? the reason y many Christians r told to evangelise NOW is becus the end is anytime. there is no 'right' time to evangelise. everytime is a right time.

Spreading the Word was nv meant to b pleasant. no one ever said tt e ppl whom u preached to WILL take wat u say n b converted. When Jesus preached the Pharisees wanted to stone Him on every occasion! Paul himself was imprisoned so many times n was flogged by ppl whom he preached to. truth b told, it is the ppl whom evangelise on the street tt truely gains my respect bcus they hv the guts to go out there n do the work of God wifout fear of rejection. some say, "y preach when they will hate it even more? its better u dnt preach if tts the case!" but i say, its better for one to hv heard the Word n hv the Seed of the Spirit b planted in his or her heart than hv the non-believers not hear the Gospel at all.

stupidissmart SG

These laws appear in the christian bible. They r not strictly jewish. (About hitting the slaves it is explicitly mentoned by Jesus christ, which made it NT). No one ever says tat just following the 2 laws means u can break all the others laws in the OT. Even Jesus says tat the old laws have to be follow faithfully forever. May I ask u from where do u get the info tat the old laws is totally irrelevant now and it was completely replaced by the 2 things u stated ? Where do it says tat the death of Jesus has totally erased off all the laws from the OT and they r totally wrong now ?

U say tat jesus will come at anytime and the end may be near. And so ? He is gonna punish the christians for not evangelising enough people or punish the people for not hearing the word which is not their fault ? I tell u non-believers don't give 2 hoot about wat your bible tell u to do. Just because bible tell them to evangelise it doesn't means they r free to insult other belief, evangelise at the most inappropriate maner, at the worst location, on the most terrible timing to the most unwilling people.

Spreading the Word was nv meant to b pleasant. no one ever said tt e ppl whom u preached to WILL take wat u say n b converted. When Jesus preached the Pharisees wanted to stone Him on every occasion! Paul himself was imprisoned so many times n was flogged by ppl whom he preached to. truth b told, it is the ppl whom evangelise on the street tt truely gains my respect bcus they hv the guts to go out there n do the work of God wifout fear of rejection. some say, "y preach when they will hate it even more? its better u dnt preach if tts the case!" but i say, its better for one to hv heard the Word n hv the Seed of the Spirit b planted in his or her heart than hv the non-believers not hear the Gospel at all.

Okie, if u wanna insist on evangelising the people ? Fine. I am gonna evangelise the opposite to the people as well. Anyway it is just gonan make your religion more hated than ever and make less people becoming a christian, something which I don't mind will happen.

« Previous Page Next Page »