The principle of understanding Christ Jesus view of the kingdom is the reading of his messages. The nature of man in that kingdom has right living written upon his motives and behaviour. Jesus was truly man with the very heart and nature of God expressed in words, character, attitudes, and wisdom; he wasn't a fortune teller. However he could foretell the destruction of Jerusalem because he could observe their behaviour. Israel's behaviour at that time gave no hope of being restored to a former glory, and their future was in the Father's hands. That did not reduce his true image of the heart and mind of God. Those that observed him as well as Mahomet agreed of him that he was without sin [flawless in imageing God in humanity]. It is for the purity of his character we worship him as Lord. He's the standard of very God lived in human flesh - his spirit not his humanity we exhalt as God. We must always recognise many of his comments reflected his very humanity, as we ourselves.

F_H has not grasped the essential spiritual concept of how Christians view God. Though I can say many Christians also still worship very physical concepts of God; that is why they have a three person image of God. There is no biblical support for such immagination. God though expressed in diversity is absolutely one character, attitudes, actions, wisdom, creation etc.

For many, they only perceive God in beautiful physical images of a sunrise or sunset; but that is his creative handiwork. God is most demonstrated in humanity that allows him to rule in their lives; in their character, attitudes, actions, wisdom and creativity to bless others lives. Remember God is eternal Spirit in whose image we were designed to live to reach our full potential. Of course we all fall short of that image, but we're renewed as we recognise our failures and desire the fullness of God. Seeking forgivness indicates we recognises the very perfection of God to be lived in our lives.

"The key to heaven is Jesus. Not religion"

"Be a man and acknowledge the sad truth of your mak-believe religion."

Ahh! Coach!

You haven't deigned to reply to any of my previous posts, so I'll make this my last one in this thread. Not that your replies would be anything more than dogma devoid of reason.

If you believe Jesus was more than a man, you have a religion.

I am not frustrated by the fact you have a religion. I am incredibly frustrated by the fact that you refuse to acknowledge it is one, and you put your view on a pedestal and denigrate others which are no more or less ritualised than yours.

Nobody else is ever going to acknowledge "the sad truth of their make-believe religion." Why on earth should they? you can't. You can't even acknowledge yours is a religion. You have a crippling blindness of faith.

The dogma you espouse, and your utter refusal to even contemplate other views is exactly what is wrong with the world.

I suspect Jesus didn't hold views like yours - from what I can tell he was a compassionate sort, willing to listen to others and understand their hardships.

Clearly, the apple has fallen a long way from the tree.

Can Islam and Christian democracy co-exist in Australia?

Agnostic Andrew Bolt highlights the absurity of Victorian vilification laws. http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,20240491-25717,00.html

ANDREW writes: Scott quoted the Koran in a way that caused laughter and we all know how dangerous laughing Christians are, don't we?

Let a top lawyer -- Debbie Mortimer, SC -- demonstrate why you should laugh at the Bracks Government's vilification laws.
Or, perhaps, why you should fear them instead.

No, no, no. That wasn't her intention at all when she appeared before Victoria's Appeal Court on Monday.

Truth be told, she'd been hired by the Islamic Council of Victoria to justify these curbs on your free speech.

To be specific, she was there to ask the three appeal judges to dismiss an appeal by two Christian pastors, who were found guilty last year under these very laws of vilifying Muslims.

She wanted those judges to think it fine that pastors Daniel Scot and Danny Nalliah were ordered by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal in December to place full-page advertisements in the papers admitting they had said allegedly bad things about Islam.

And she hoped they would approve VCAT's order that these two Pentecostal pastors not repeat what they truly thought about Islam or to even hint it -- to instead keep their mouths shut even in other states where people are still mercifully free to say what these pastors may not.

But by now you must think these two pastors surely said something especially wicked to have been silenced so completely. Maybe Mortimer is on the side of justice.

All right, I won't hide from you the sordid truth.

VCAT's Justice Michael Higgins in December ruled Scot in particular had broken the Government's vilification laws by quoting the Koran in a way that got "a response from the audience at various times in the form of laughter".

We all know how dangerous laughing Christians are, don't we? No wonder a complaint was abruptly lodged by three Muslim converts who'd monitored the church seminar at the request of a Muslim ICV official then working for the Equal Opportunity Commission

Cont:
In his judgment, Higgins listed 13 examples how Scot had "made fun of Muslim beliefs and conduct". And here is where this case gets surreal: at least eight of them involve Scot quoting the Koran -- I believe, quoting it accurately.

It's true, the Koran does indeed say men may "beat" their wives. It does indeed urge believers to "kill-disbelievers-where-you-find-them". It really does call for thieves to have a hand chopped off.

...Higgins did not identify anything he said that was actually false, other than an immigration statistic. Oh, Scot failed to quote a Koranic verse that said Allah actually was merciful, so there.

Higgins found Scot erred because he "failed to differentiate between Muslims throughout the world (and) preached a literal translation of the Koran and of Muslims' religious practices that was not mainstream".

..Perhaps he knows better than does Scot, who was born in Pakistan and has studied the Koran for years, what is mainstream Islamic teaching and what is not.

Indeed, the judge may understand Islam better than does even the Mufti of Australia himself, Sheik Taj Al-Din Al-Halali, who seems to feel Islam's a faith that entitles him to say September 11 attacks were "God's work against oppressors", suicide bombers are "heroes" and Muslims must "prove our manhood towards God" in a "war of infidels".

Will someone please inform the Mufti that his interpretation of Islam is contradicted by Justice Higgins, and he should take religious instruction from him? Or is it just possible that it's the judge's opinion of Islam that isn't so mainstream?

I guess ..what is authentic Muslim teaching is just a matter of opinion, after all, and it's just bad luck Scot's side of the argument has been ruled illegal, no matter how true it may be.

Geoffrey Nettle, asked, "Surely that (vilification law) can't justify restraining them from saying something that said by anyone else would be legal?" he asked.

Replied Mortimer of the ICV: "The tribunal has found there is something wrong with saying it. Truth is not a defence, its irrelevant to contravention of the Act.

Philo,

You quoted:
"F_H has not grasped the essential spiritual concept of how Christians view God"

You kind of missed the point: I don't care how do you view God and I am not expecting you to 'grasp' my or any other view.

Do we accept each other 'as is' without judgement is the point I am making.

All the best,

Fellow_Human,
As a person of good will I totally accept you. However if we are talking about working together as one rationalised world view we must define how we read reality. From your post it seems obvious that Islams view of How God is revealed incarnate is not considered important; that for Christians is paramount to their faith and world view; therefore it will mean both cannot walk the same path.

God is not a creed to be recited, but an incarnation to be lived. So it is important for Christians to place the spirit of God in us at the pinnacle of human expression. God being incarnate is more about our lives than merely mental assent to religious dogma and ritual. Christ Jesus is the message from God, not merely his words as a prophet but the actions and attitudes of his life as a true light. That is why we must examine the life of those claiming to speak for God, do they represent His pure Character.