Hello Dondi,
>The Christian scriptures (the New Testament) are pretty explicit on the >idea that we have only one life:
"And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:" - Hebrews 9:27
That is no lay down misere.
And why would that have a bearing on whether or not Brahma is the same as our Father God?
Blessings,
Br.Bruce
We die once, hence we are not reincarnated, lest we die again. Does not Hinduism teach reincarnation? If so, then Brahma's's judgement would be different than the Christian God, which teaches a final judgment from one life, would it not?
"Something from the Letter to the Hebrews should also be mentioned which is often carelessly quoted as a negation of the idea of reincarnation: 'And just as it is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgement' (9:27)......
"It is the Letter to the Hebrews which again and again uses the word 'once' (hapax or ephapax) in relation to the deed of Christ in order to make it quite clear that Christ made the descent into the sphere of death, into sarx, through Golgotha once and for all, and that His 'coming again' will be a spiritual event occurring under entirely different conditions. The idea of death is here used as indicative of something irrevocable and decisive that concludes a man's life on earth and happens in the course of it only once.
"A mortal on earth is thereby able to understand just what in the highest sense is meant by 'once' in relation to Christ's deed......
"This uniqueness of the experience of death would not be affected by thoughts of reincarnation. As a particular person, a man dies only once. In a following incarnation, the eternal individuality that goes through all of them builds up another person, through which it 'sounds' (per-sonat - The word comes from the latin 'persona', an actor's mask. Translator's note.) But death is something that happens once to each person. After that--judgement. This would also be affirmed from the point of view of reincarnation. Death is followed by the experience of the sternest trials.
"Besides, the original text of that Letter to the Hebrews does not say 'the judgement', but only 'judgement' (krisis).
"There is indeed also in the New Testament the concept of a Last Judgement but that does not exclude 'judgement' being experienced 'already now' in each case after death. There are also moments even in earthly life when one can be profoundly shaken by the experience of a 'judgement'. It meant judgement for Peter when he said to Christ: 'Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord' (Luke 5:8).
"Thus, this sentence from the Letter to the Hebrews contains nothing that would stand in the way of the possibility of repeated lives on earth.
Yes. To a greater or lesser degree.Are we worshiping the same God?
Yes. Jesus Christ, His apostles and His Church seem to think so ... the Gospels are explicit on the point that Jesus Christ is the fulfillment of the prophecies made to Israel ... Christ's enemies constantly tried to catch Him out on points of Law, and failed, but in the end He was crucified for blasphemy against the God of Israel ... so His entire message and mission is framed in a Judaic context ... He was not proclaiming His Father or God as other than the God of the Jews.Do you think Christianity is rooted from Judaism ?
Revelation.How is Judaism came out ?
Do you believe the God of Christianity is the same as the God of Judaism or the God of Hinduism?
What are the evidences ?
Thomas said:The egalitarian notion of the equality of religions is an invention of modernism, and born of the philosophy of relativism, a philosophy which all authentic religions reject.
Yes, if one believes that G!d is all powerful and talks to all of his creations, and that those who heard the word interpreted it differently based on their knowledge and societal notions, this may be called a modernistic view...or it may just be that since we have become globally smaller it is an inherent evolutionary thing just like us starting to understand each others ways and not determining we have to be at war with all our neighbors that think a little differently than we.Yet "authentic religions" reject the notion that other "authentic religions" are true. So how can we reconcile this with what really IS true?
ahem. there is equality and equality. not all religions are equal. however, the notion of there being *value* in other religions is certainly pre-modern, one might even say pagan. as we would say, it's about how you act, not what you believe - "idolatry is not a matter of statues" (r. meiri, C12th) and "the righteous amongst the nations will inherit the World to Come" (mishnah, C2nd-C4th) - note the emphasis, it is not the nation that is a good thing, but the righteousness.Thomas said:The egalitarian notion of the equality of religions is an invention of modernism, and born of the philosophy of relativism, a philosophy which all authentic religions reject.
I'm speaking from a Roman Catholic perspective, and we do not reject the notion of the religious impulse in man, in fact in the Catechism man is described foremost as a religious being. We acknowledge the religious impulse visible in other traditions, as we also acknowledge them as shades and presentments of the Incarnation.Yet "authentic religions" reject the notion that other "authentic religions" are true. So how can we reconcile this with what really IS true?
Indeed it is, born of a philosophy of relativism ... but it is not the Catholic philosophical viewpoint.Yes, if one believes that G!d is all powerful and talks to all of his creations, and that those who heard the word interpreted it differently based on their knowledge and societal notions, this may be called a modernistic view...
If you put all on an equal footing. I do not.However with the predominance of so many different religions and sects and denominations within those religions if you truly believe only one to be right...you got less than a 1% chance that it is yours![]()
ahem. there is equality and equality. not all religions are equal. however, the notion of there being *value* in other religions is certainly pre-modern, one might even say pagan. as we would say, it's about how you act, not what you believe - "idolatry is not a matter of statues" (r. meiri, C12th) and "the righteous amongst the nations will inherit the World to Come" (mishnah, C2nd-C4th) - note the emphasis, it is not the nation that is a good thing, but the righteousness.
God doesn't care which religion I belong to, or even if I am religious at all!
Agreed, but in the context of what? It's not what we do, it's why we do it ... and any humanist would agree with that sentiment ... in fact I have had those very words said to me, whilst laughing at my 'naive' notion that there might be something other than empirical reality ...What matters most is what I do with what I know (or believe), and what I learn along the way ... including how I treat other people...