What Bible says about Celebrating Christmas

It is well known that Jesus wasn’t born on 25^th December. It is one of the most widely propagated lie which has been accepted without pondering.

 In Gospel of Luke (KJV) there  are some accounts related to the birth of Jesus(pbuh):

{2:1} And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. {2:2} ([And] this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.) {2:3} And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city. {2:4} And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:) {2:5} To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child. {2:6} And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered. {2:6} And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered

Parents of Jesus(pbuh) came to Bethlehem to register themselves as there was a decree from Ceaser Augustus. This census is only possible in summer due to freezing temperature in winter.  Verse continues…….

{2:7} And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn. {2:8} And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.

 At the time of birth of Jesus (pbuh) shepherds were keeping watch over their flock in the field . This can only be possible in summer or early winter but not in extreme winter i.e 25^th December.

 Biblical evidence are clear that Jesus(as) was born in summer and not in winter.

 Why 25^th December  was selected for celebrating Christmas ??

There are no records of early Christians celebrating this till council of  Nicea. Early pagans used to celebrate b’day of their pagan Sun God Mithra on 25^th December. Christians inherited this from pagans.

Some people argue
Yes we know, Christ wasn’t born on 25^th Dec but we do just to commemorate the birth and what is wrong??

 This is a common reply we get which show the level of religious ignorance. Lets ponder over some of the verses from bible :

Matthew {5:17} Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. {5:18} For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. {5:19} Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach [them,] the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. {5:20} For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed [the righteousness] of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

So Jesus (pbuh) said that he has come to fulfill the law of earlier Prophet (as per Bible its Old Testament), till the end no one should break even a single law from OT else He will be called least!

 Now lets see what what earlier law (OT) says about celebrating Pagan’s festivals:

Jeremiah {10:1} Hear ye the word which the LORD speaketh unto you, O house of Israel: {10:2} Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them. {10:3} For the customs of the people [are] vain: for [one] cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. {10:4} They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.{10:5} They [are] upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also [is it] in them to do good.

 There is a clear command not to follow Pagan’s way or celebrate their festivals, Interesting it specifically speaks about (prohibits) cutting tree and decorating it like the way Christians do with Christmas tree on the occasion of Christmas!!

Celebrating Christmas = Breaking law of OT = Breaking the command of Jesus (pbuh)

Still they  claim that they love Jesus (pbuh)! 
Related Articles

John 3:16, Son of God ??

Hoax of Love & Peace in Bible!


By Mohammed Tariq

Interview with Jesus (pbuh), Disciples, and Paul

To Jesus: who are you ??
"I am a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God." John 8:40

To the Disciples: who is Jesus?
"Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know." Acts 2:22

To the people: who is Jesus ??
"He was a prophet who did powerful miracles, and he was a mighty teacher in the eyes of God and all the people." Luke 24:19

To Paul: who is Jesus ??
"Christ lives all the fullness of God in a human body." Colossians 2:9

To Jesus: what do yo teach ??
"'I want you to show mercy, not offer sacrifices.' For I have come to call not those who think they are righteous, but those who know they are sinners."

"I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." Luke 5:32

To the Disciples: what did Jesus taught??
"Now repent of your sins and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped away." Acts 3:19

To Paul: what did Jesus taught??
"Christ died for our sins" 1 Corinthians 15:3


To Jesus: to whom you were sent ??
"I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel." Matthew 15:24

To the Disciples: what Jesus instructed ??
"Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel." Matthew 10:6

To Paul: Why did you go to the Gentiles ??
"It has always been my ambition to preach the gospel where Christ was not known, so that I would not be building on someone else's foundation." Romans 15:20

to Paul: do you mean the Disciples??
"I don't consider myself inferior in any way to these "super apostles" who teach such things. I may not be a trained speaker, but I do have knowledge. We have made this perfectly clear to you in every way." 2 Corinthians 11:6


To Jesus: did you came to abolish the law ??
"Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. "Matt. 5:17,18

To Paul: what do you say about that??
"Jesus abolished in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations." Eph. 2:15

"Christ is the end of the law, that every one who has faith may be justified." Rom. 10:4

To the Disciples: Is man Justified by faith alone??
"man is justified by works and not by faith alone." James 2:24

To Paul: what do you say about that ??
"man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law." Romans 3:28

To Paul: so you contradict the disciples of Jesus ??
"When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong." Galatians 2:11

To Paul: so what do you say about their teachings ??
"If we or an angel from heaven preach any other Gospel to you than what we (Paul and his disciples) have preached to you let him be a curse " Gal 1:8

To Paul: why do you say that??
"all those in Asia have turned away from me" 2 Tim. 1:15

to the Disciples: did you rejected Paul??
"When he came to Jerusalem, he tried to join us, but we were all afraid of him, not believing that he really was a disciple." Acts 9:26

Taken From FB group Awake Christians.

Islamic ruling on the issue of imitating the kuffaar in their customs and dealings?

What is the Islamic ruling on the issue of imitating the kuffaar in their customs and dealings? What are the guidelines concerning that in Islamic sharee’ah? Is every imitation of the actions of the kuffaar regarded as a haraam kind of imitation – knowing that there are many things that the kaafirs do that are not haraam and are not condemned by sharee’ah, where the one who does them does not do them merely to imitate the kuffaar, but because he thinks those things are good, as Ibn Mas’ood (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: “What the Muslims think is good is good before Allaah”?
Please advise us, may Allaah honour you, and please give me a detailed answer and explain to me the guidelines on this matter.

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

The Muslims have no need to imitate any of the other nations in matters of religious rituals and acts of worship, for Allaah has perfected His religion and completed His Favour, and chosen for us Islam as our religion, as He says (interpretation of the meaning):

“This day, I have perfected your religion for you, completed My Favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion”

[al-Maa'idah 5:3]

Islam forbids the Muslims to imitate the kuffaar, especially the Jews and Christians, but this prohibition does not apply to all their affairs, rather it applies to matters of their religion and things that are unique to them, by which they are known.

It was narrated from Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “You will certainly follow the ways of those who came before you hand span by hand span, cubit by cubit, to the extent that if they entered the hole of a lizard, you will enter it too.” We said: “O Messenger of Allaah, (do you mean) the Jews and the Christians?” He said: “Who else?” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 1397; Muslim, 4822.

This hadeeth indicates that it is haraam to imitate the Jews and the Christians, and that those who follow them and tread the same path as them are criticized. Islam has reinforced this prohibition, by describing those who imitate the kuffaar as being of them.

It was narrated that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar said: The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever imitates a people is one of them.” Narrated by Abu Dawood, 3512; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Irwa’ al-Ghaleel, 2691.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

This at the very least indicates that it is haraam to imitate them, although the apparent meaning is that the one who imitates them is a kaafir.

Iqtida’ al-Siraat al-Mustaqeem, 237.

The one who imitates the kuffaar feels that inferior and defeated, so he hastens to make up for his feelings of inadequacy by imitating those whom he admires. If these people were to ponder the greatness of Islamic sharee’ah and understand how corrupt is that civilization they are running after, they would realize that they are doing wrong and that they have forsaken something that is perfect and true for something that is imperfect and corrupt.

Secondly:

The types of imitation which are forbidden to us are many.

Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan said:

The things in which the kuffaar are imitated include acts of worship, such as imitating them in matters of shirk, such as building (structures) over graves, building shrines and exaggerating about them. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “May the curse of Allaah be upon the Jews and the Christians, for they took the graves of their Prophets as places of worship.” Al-Bukhaari, 425; Muslim, 531. And he told us that when a righteous man among them died, they would build a place of worship over his grave, and install images therein, and that they were the most evil of mankind. Al-Bukhaari, 417; Muslim, 528. Nowadays there are instances of major shirk because of exaggeration concerning graves, as is well known to scholars and ordinary folk alike. The cause of that is imitation of the Jews and Christians.

Another example is their imitation of the festivals of shirk and bid’ah, such as birthday celebrations, whether it is the birthday of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or the birthdays of presidents and kings. Or these festivals of bid’ah and shirk may be named after days or weeks, such as a country’s national day or independence day, or Mother’s Day, or hygiene week, and other days or weeks that are celebrated. All of these have come to the Muslims from the kuffaar, for Islam has only two festivals: Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha. Anything else is bid’ah and an imitation of the kuffaar.

From a khutbah entitled al-Hathth ‘ala Mukhaalafat al-Kuffaar (Exhortation to be distinct from the kuffaar)

In the answer to question no. 47060 we have stated that it is forbidden to imitate the kuffaar in the clothing that is unique to them and in the customs that are unique to them, such as imitating them by shaving the beard.

Thirdly:

The prohibition on imitating the kuffaar applies to their acts of worship and the customs that are unique to them and by which they are distinguished, not the things that they do and invent from which we may benefit. There is no sin on the Muslims if they share in that, rather the Muslims should be in the forefront of such things.

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen said:

With regard to the phrase “imitation of the kuffaar”, that does not mean that we should not use anything that they have manufactured. No one says such a thing. At the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and afterwards the people used to wear clothes made by the kuffaar and use vessels made by them.

Imitation of the kuffaar means imitating their clothing and appearance, and the customs that are unique to them. It does not mean that we should not ride what they ride or wear what they wear. But if they ride in a specific way that is unique to them, then we should not ride in that way. If they tailor their clothes in a certain fashion that is unique to them, we should not do likewise. But if we have cars that are similar to theirs and fabric that is similar to theirs, there is nothing wrong with that.

Majmoo’ Fataawa al-Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, 12, question 177.

And he said:

The definition of imitating is when the imitator does something that is unique to those whom he is imitating. Imitation of the kuffaar refers to when a Muslim does something that is one of their unique characteristics. With regard to that which has become widespread among the Muslims and is no longer something by which the kuffaar are distinguished, then this is not imitation of the kuffaar, and it is not haraam because it is an imitation, unless it is haraam for some other reason. What we have said is what is indicated by the meaning of the word tashabbuh (imitation).

Majmoo’ Fataawa al-Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, 12, question 198.

In the answer to question no. 21694 you will find a detailed discussion of the ruling on imitating the kuffaar. See question no. 43160 for further details.

Fourthly:

There are both beneficial things and harmful things in non-Muslim civilization. We should not ignore the good things and take the harmful things. This attitude was summed up by Shaykh al-Shanqeeti (may Allaah have mercy on him) who said:

Our attitude towards western civilization may be one of four things, and there is no fifth:

1- Ignoring this civilization, good points and bad alike.

2- Adopting it in whole, good points and bad.

3- Adopting the bad things and not the good.

4- Adopting the good things and not the bad.

The first three are undoubtedly wrong and only one of them is undoubtedly good, which is the last one.

Adwa’ al-Bayaan, 4/382.

Fifthly:

With regard to the words of ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood (may Allaah be pleased with him), “What the Muslims think is good is good before Allaah”, this does not refer to things that go against sharee’ah but which may be deemed good on the basis of rational thinking. Imam al-Shaafa’i (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “Whoever thinks something is good issuing a ruling.” It does not refer to when one person thinks a thing is good but the majority of people do not. Rather this phrase may be interpreted in one of two ways, both of which are sound:

1 – That what is meant is traditions and customs that do not go against sharee’ah

2 – That what is meant is the proof of scholarly consensus, for the Muslims are unanimously agreed that thinking a thing is good is consensus which counts as evidence. So this thing must be good before Allaah as well. This is what is indicated by the words, “What the Muslims think is good.”

See al-Mabsoot by al-Sarkhasi, 12/138’ al-Faroosiyyah by Ibn al-Qayyim, p. 298.

These interpretations mentioned above are applicable if we take the words of Ibn Mas’ood (may Allaah be pleased with him) as applying to all the Muslims in general. But from the context it seems that he is referring to the companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) only, and not others. What Ibn Mas’ood said was: “Allaah looked into the hearts of His slaves and found that the heart of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was the best of all His slaves’ hearts. So He chose him for Himself and sent him with His Message. Then He looked into the hearts of all His slaves after the heart of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and He found that the hearts of his companions were the best of all His slaves’ hearts, so He made them the helpers of His Prophet, fighting for the sake of his religion. So what the Muslims think is good is good before Allaah and whatever the Muslims think is bad is bad before Allaah.”

Narrated by Ahmad, 3418; classed as saheeh by Shaykh al-Albaani in Takhreej al-Tahhaawiyyah, 530.

Whatever the case, it is not correct to quote the words of Ibn Mas’ood (may Allaah be pleased with him) as evidence for thinking as good that which is forbidden in Islam, such as imitating the mushrikeen.

And Allaah knows best.

Islam Q&A

HOW THE TRINITY DEVELOPED INTO A CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE

Persecution of the Christians and the suppression of the early Church under the Roman emperors which began in the first century, ended with the coming into power of Constantine the Great at the Milvian Bridge in 312 C.E. Consequently, through conversion to Christianity special favors were offered to the people in the form of political, military and social gains. As a result, thousands of non-Christians joined the Church and enabled Constantine to wield great power over the Church affairs.

It was during the reign of Constantine that the idea of Jesus Christ as co-equal to God, the Father began to gain momentum. Yet, Trinity was not an established doctrine at that time. The idea of a triune god stirred great controversy within the Church as still many clergy and laymen did not accept the position of Christ as God. (12) 

This disagreement reached the level of confrontation between Bishop Alexander of Alexandria, Egypt and his presbyter Arius. Bishop Alexander taught that Jesus was equal to God but not Arius. So at a synod held at Alexandria in 321 C.E., Arius was deposed and excommunicated. (13)

Arius, tought in institutional disfavor, still had much support outside Egypt. Many of the important bishops, such as the learned historian Eusebius of Palestinian Caesarea and his powerful namesake, Eusebius, Bishop of Nicomedia, theologically agree with Arius: Jesus Christ is not God. (14)

The sustained controversy disturbed Constantine and in order to legitimatize his position, he invited all bishops of the Christian Church to Nicaea (which is now in Asia Minor) in May 325 C.E. Thus, the Council of Nicaea began to settle the dispute concerning the relationship between God and His son. Constantine, who was in charge of the proceedings, exercised his political power to bring to bear the bishops to accept his theological position. The creed signed by 218 bishops was clearly anti-Arian. In other words, the Creed of Nicaea endorsed the Son as co-equal to God. Two hundred eighteen of the bishops signed this creed, although it was actually the work of a minority. (15)

The Encyclopedia Britannica summarizes the proceedings of the Council of Niacea as follows:

The Council of Niacea met on May 20, 325. Constantine himself presiding, actively guiding the discussion, and personally proposed (no doubt on Ossius' prompting) the crucial formula expressing the relation of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council, "of one substance with the Father." Over-awed by the emperor, the bishops, with two exceptions only, signed the creed, many of them against their inclination. Constantine regarded the decision of Nicaea as divinely inspired. As long as he lived no one dared openly to challenge the Creed of Nicaea; but the expected concord did not follow. (16)

The Creed of Nicaea

We believe in one God the Father All-sovereign, maker to all things visible and invisible; And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, only-begotten, that is, of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father, through whom all things were made, things in heaven and things on the earth; who for us men and for our salvation came down and was made flesh, and became man, suffered, and rose on the third day, ascended into the heavens, is coming to judge living and dead.

And in the Holy Spirit,
And those that say 'There was when he was not,' and, 'Before he was begotten he was not,' and that, 'He came into being from what-is-not; or those that allege, that the son of God is 'Of another substance or essence'
Or 'created,'
Or, 'changeable'
Or 'alterable,'
These the Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes.

"The 'Nicaea' Creed

Bettenson explains the Nicene Creed as follows:

[It was] found in Epiphanius, Ancoratus, 118, C.A.D. 374, and extracted by scholars, almost word for word, from the Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril of Jerusalem; read and approved at Chalcedon, 451, as the creed of '(the 318 fathers who met at Nicaea and that of) the 150 who met at a later time' (i.e., at Constantinopolitan, 381). Hence often called the Constantinopolitan or Nicaeno-ConstantinopolitanCreed, and thought by many to be a revision of the creed of Jerusalem held by Cyril.

We believe in one God the Father All-sovereign, maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible; 

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, Begotten of the Father before all ages, Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the father, through whom all things were made; who for us men and for our salvation came down from the heavens, and was made flesh of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and became man, and was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried, and rose again on the third day according to the Scriptures, and ascended into the heavens, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father, and cometh again with glory to judge living and dead, of whose kingdom there shall be no end: 

And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and the Life-giver, that proceedeth from the Father, who with Father and Son is worshipped together and glorified together, who spake through the prophets:

In one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church:

We acknowledge one baptism unto remission of sins. We look for a resurrection of the dead, and the life of the age to come. (17) Though the Council of bishops accepted the Creed of Nicaea there was no mention of the Trinity.

The controversy over the nature of Jesus continued for several decades. In the year 381 C.E. a second ecumenical council met in Constantinople.(18) This council adopted the Nicene Creed stating that Jesus and God were co-equal, co-eternal and the deity of the Holy Spirit. The doctrine of the Trinity came to be formally established as the cornerstone of Christian faith for the next fifteen centuries. 

Note: Like the "Lords Prayer" (Matt. 6:9-13, The Bilble), all Roman Catholics are required to memorize the "Nicene Creed" which they include in their prayers. 

Emperor Theodosius made belief in Christianity a matter of imperial command:

"It is Our Will all the peoples We rule shall practice that religion which the divine Peter the Apostle transmitted to the Romans. We shall believe in the single Deity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, under the concept of equal majesty and of the Holy Trinity.

We command that those persons who follow this rule shall embrace the name of Catholic Christians. The rest, however, whom We adjudge demented and insane, shall sustain the infamy of heretical dogmas, their meeting place shall not receive the name of churches and they shall be smitten first by divine vengeance and secondly by the retribution of Our own initiative. We shall assume in accordance with divine judgment."(19)

Subsequently, the doctrine of the veneration of Mary as the "mother of God" and "bearer of God" was also formulated at the Second Council of Constantinople (553 C.E.) and the title of "Eternal Virgin" was added. "In the prayers and hymns of the Orthodox Church the name of the mother of God is invoked as often as in the name of Christ and the Holy Trinity"…." In the Roman Catholic doctrine, Mary, the mother of God, was identified with the figure of the divine Wisdom. The process of deifying the mother of God went a step further here, in that Mary is treated like a divine hypostasis (substance). the figure of heavenly Wisdom."(20)

--------
(12) Victor Paul Wierwille: Jesus Christ is not God, American Christian Press. The Way International, New Knoxville, Ohio 45871, (1975-1981), p. 22-23.

(13) Hase, A History of the Christian Church, p. 111. (See – Ibid, p. 23).

(14) Henry Chadwick, The Early Church (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1968), p. 129. (See – Ibid, p.23).

(15) Henry Bettenson, ed., Documents of the Christian Church, 2nd ed. (London: Oxford University Press, 1963), p. 58. "Arius and his followers were forthwith banished to IIIyria and his work were burned. The reverberations of this treatment of Arius had a profound effect on the Church, as well as on Constantine, for several decades. Just as Arius was to have been pardoned by Constantine and reinstated in the Church, he died." (See – Ibid, p.24)

(16) Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1968, s.v. "Council of Nicaea." (See – Ibid, pp. 24-25).

(17) Victor Paul Wierwille: "Jesus Christ is Not God", American Christian Press, New Knoxville, Ohio, pp. 26-27.

(18) B.K. Kuiper, The Church in History (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., p. 128 (See – Ibid, p.25).

(19) (Bamber Gascoigne: "The Christians", Granda Publishing Limited, 1976, Frogmore, St Albans, Herts AI2 2NF and 3 Upper Jemes Street, London Wir 4BP, p. 9).

(20) Encyclopaedia Britannica, Macropaedia, Vol. 4, Christianity, p. 483.



Taken From

Nunneries or Brothel !! - Sex, violence, corruption, insider exposes rock the Kerala church

SIVARAM V.

A nun at the Little Flower convent in Narakkal, Kochi

KERALA: THE CHURCH

To Cast The First Stone

Sex, violence, corruption, insider exposes rock the Kerala church

“Later, I’m taken to the priest’s room for coffee. While I’m having coffee sitting on the cot, the only place in the room to sit, he comes and embraces me hard, almost suffocating me. When I struggle to escape from his clutches, he squeezes my breasts and asks me to show them to him. ‘Have you seen a man?’ Stunned, I shake my head ‘no’. In no time, he undresses himself.”
Sister Jesme in her book Amen: The Autobiography of a Nun

***

“The convents and nunneries are being converted into brothels. The priests have sex with the nuns at night in these convents. Because of these acts, the chastity of the priests and nuns has come under suspicion. Their love for God has shrunk...some of the clergy protect their chastity by watching pornography and reading pornographic material. They lose themselves in this habit. These books and DVDs are kept in secret places and can’t be found easily.”
Father Shibu Kalamparambil in his memoir Oru Vaidikante Hrudayamitha (The Heart of a Priest)

***

“The cry of a baby came from the bathroom of one of the inner rooms along with the sobs of a woman. We used our might to force open the bathroom door and what we saw would break anyone’s heart. A nun who had given birth to a child was pushing the head of the baby into the closet. The bathroom was filled with blood. The legs of the child, which were sticking out of the closet, were kicking for life.”
Sister Mary Chandy in her autobiography Nanma Niranjavale Swasthi(Peace to the One filled with Grace)

***

On the gentle slopes of Pulpally, Wayanad, where the Naxal movement once sent terror into the hearts of the land-owning gentry, a lone ex-nun, Sister Mary Chandy, is raising the hackles of the Catholic church. Her autobiography, Nanma Niranjavale Swasthi, a no-holds-barred account of her life in the convent, is littered with pregnant nuns and wayward priests. The 67-year-old Sister’s memoirs comes a good 14 years after she walked out of the congregation of the Daughters of Presentation of Mary in Chevayur, Kozhikode, in north Kerala. The Church was quick to proclaim that Sister Mary was never a nun in any of their convents and asked the laity in Wayanad not to associate with her.
So what happened after she saw the nun trying to kill her newborn baby in a convent in Mananthavady in Wayanad, as she has described in autobiography? “After I broke open the door with the help of another nun, I grabbed the child and held it to my chest. I thought I was doing the right thing but the sisters turned against me. I want to know why. In a previous incident, when I hit a priest on his head with a stool when he tried to grab me, the nuns sympathised with the priest. From then on, I was watched carefully.” After 40 years, Sister Mary fled the convent life.

“Earlier, most of the nuns, priests suffered in silence. Now some are openly questioning the church.”Sara Joseph, Feminist Author

Mary Chandy’s book has many more such harrowing tales. Like the nun who had tried to commit suicide many times over telling her of priests coming to the convent well past midnight and taking nuns out to the nearby schools. When this nun was called, she would not open the door. She was terrified the priests would break down the door and come for her. She said she hated this life of fear and wanted to end it. In one chapter, Mary Chandy recounts how porn magazines and CDs are commonplace among the priests. In one instance, she says a young nun came to her crying as another senior nun was forcing her to watch these videos with her. Elsewhere, Mary describes feast days in the seminaries when wine flows freely and there is dancing and much else. Once a father asked her to join in the revelries saying life is meant to be enjoyed. When she refused, he threatened her with dire consequences.Tell-all memoirs are not new in Kerala, nor are church scandals. The Sister Abhaya murder case (1992) has still not seen closure and in the last five years there have been three other cases of alleged nun ‘suicides’. But a nun coming out, writing an autobiography, warts and all, was a first even for Kerala. Sister Jesme’s autobiography three years ago caused quite a stir and embarrassed the church no end. Following close behind was Father Shibu Kalamparambil’s effort in 2010, which described in excruciating detail the depraved lives that many priests and nuns led. And now comes Sister Mary Chandy’s memoir, about nuns who got pregnant by priests and aborted foetuses and other such horror stories.

Noted writer and feminist Sara Joseph, whose novel Othappu incidentally explores the life of a nun who leaves the convent, says, “Most of the nuns and priests suffer in silence for suffering is a quality that they are conditioned to accept as a virtue. What you see here is the expression of the individual’s conflict with the establishment. They did not have the courage till now to take on the establishment but now they are openly questioning it.” Joseph Pullikunnel, editor ofHosanna and director of the Indian Institute of Christian Studies, says he hasn’t heard anything like this against the Catholic church, in such an open manner, ever before. “Perhaps the church was ‘whitewashing’ itself,” he says hesitantly.
Ex-MP and commentator Dr Sebastian Paul is a bit more unabashed about the sociological implications of these revelations: “These autobiographies have become bestsellers but the allegations they make have not been publicly debated. So there is not much impact on the organisation. The Catholic Church is a highly centralised organisation and there is very little criticism happening within.”
So will a soon-to-be-released film, aptly titled Father, Son and Holy Ghost, on the hardships and dilemmas faced by nuns, put things in perspective? “The Church is traditionally patriarchal. I have explored the lives of two nuns in a nunnery in my film and have touched on various aspects, including homosexuality and abortion,” says director T. Deepesh.
That doesn’t sound like things are going to get better. Father Paul Thelakat, spokesperson of the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church, says the fathers and nuns who have left the order and are writing books now are the ones who could not cope with the spiritual life. As he puts it, “If one cannot stay celibate, it is better to get out, marry and live happily. One is called to a difficult way of life; it needs an ascetic’s will to live a life of celibacy happily. It is always better to marry than to ‘burn’ mentally. I do not appreciate those who make a hue and cry of something they fail to live up to and then blame others for their failures. It is too naive to say, ‘since I could not, nobody can’.”

“You can’t make a hue and cry over something you can’t live up to, then blame others for their failures.”Fr Paul Thelakat, Spokesperson, Syro-Malabar Catholic Church

Kerala, incidentally, has now around 50,000 priests and nuns. And, incredibly, there are about 1,35,000 of them outside the state, serving in various institutions in India and abroad. Malayalis constitute a sizeable 15 per cent of the world’s Catholic priests and nuns. For the past few decades, their strength has been growing while the reverse is the case in the West. Brother Mani Mekkunnel, national secretary of the Conference of Religious India, points out that one cannot disregard the importance of Catholic institutions and the yeoman’s service they do to society. He feels the media picks on stray incidents and “unsubstantiated accounts” to judge the entire edifice of the Church and millions of its devout followers. “Why don’t you focus on the hundreds and thousands of priests and nuns who are living for a noble cause? Today, English education is synonymous with convent education. Catholic institutions have contributed in an immense way to India’s economic growth. Why not highlight that?”Sara Joseph too stresses the unsubstantiated clause, saying if these writers want to be taken seriously they must reveal names. “Only if they are exposed can they be questioned,” she says. Take, for instance, Sister Mary’s book. It takes no names nor are dates clearly mentioned. Fr Stephen Mathew, director of Neethivedi, an NGO in Wayanad, points out, “We are suspicious because they haven’t revealed everything. A small minority may be behaving like this...but it is not good to generalise.”
The Church’s critics, though, offer a different view. They feel even if it’s only a handful of priests and nuns who have spoken out, it’s still a brave effort as it is unthinkable for the majority to speak against the strict order. There is both fear and subservience. Those who dare to leave this cloistered life are often not accepted by even their family and are ostracised by society. And most don’t even have a place to stay.
“Judas! Fallen Angel! Mad! These are some of the epithets being hurled my way by the church,” says Sister Jesme, 56, a former principal of St Mary’s College, Thrissur, fully at ease in a pair of red tights and a black T-shirt, enjoying her freedom in her tiny flat in Guruvayur. “I am foisted as an example to quell dissidents within the nunneries and seminaries. They preach that I have been disowned by my family and by the Church and the same would befall anyone who dares to be another Sr Jesme.” Fr Shibu says his parents were threatened by the Church. They were even told that they would not be buried in the church cemetery if they accepted him back home.
Curiously, this comes at a time when the Vatican itself is under attack. A tell-all bestseller,Sua Santita, has outed confidential personal letters between the Pope and his associates revealing many embarrassing details. Last month, the head of the Vatican bank was sacked on money-laundering charges. Many connected with the Church say the kind of depravity prevalent among the priests and nuns in Kerala and abroad is because of the arcane rules and practices. This perhaps is the time to usher in some much-needed reforms in the Catholic Church. As Dr Valson Thampu, principal of St Stephen’s College, Delhi, puts out, “Every institution stands in need of continual reform. What is not reformed or renewed is headed for death. Only those who are spiritually insensitive will resist reform.” So will the Church let more light into its pews or wait for another book by one of its own to rake up another scandal?

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?281624

Paul preached that sins would not be forgiven unless blood and flesh of Jesus (peace be upon him) is offered to God:

Paul preached that sins would not be forgiven unless blood and flesh of Jesus (peace be upon him) is offered to God:

“And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.” (Heb 9:22)

Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ, Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father: (Gal 1:3-4)


In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace; (Eph 1:7)


Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. (Tit 2:13-14)


And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. (1 Co 15:14)

And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. (Col 1:20)

(King James Version, e-Sword)

In the above passages, Paul assumes that the only way sin of mankind can be forgiven and subsequent salvation can be attained, is through the blood shed of Jesus (peace be upon him).


Nevertheless, Paul by writing the above passages and Christian apologists by appealing to the above verses reject the teachings of multiple Old Testament (OT) Prophets and New Testament (NT) Prophet – Jesus (peace be upon him) himself. As we are going to see, Paul failed to realize that their (OT prophet’s) deity was less an exacting accountant and more a merciful God.

Pre – Pauline Teachings on Repentance and Forgiveness

For instance, consider the sayings of OT prophet Joel:

“But even now,” says the LORD, “repent sincerely, and return to me with fasting and weeping and mourning. Let your broken heart show your sorrow; tearing your clothes is not enough.” Come back to the LORD your God. He is kind and full of mercy; he is patient and keeps his promise; he isalways ready to forgive and not punish. Perhaps the LORD your God will change his mind and bless you with abundant crops. Then you can offer him corn and wine. (Joel 2: 12-14)

Notice that unlike Paul who nails the forgiveness of sins on the cross, Jewish prophet Joel emphatically states that God is too kind, forgiving and considerate to accept sincere repentance and blot out sins! Joel’s God invites sinners to Himself so that He may forgive their sins! God of the OT does not need any cross to forgive sins, His mere virtue of kindness is enough amalgamated with the fasting, weeping and mourning of sinners.

Observe that God does not instruct Joel’s community to return with belief in the alleged, would-be crucifixion of Christ (peace be upon him) but with 

(i) fasting 
(ii) weeping 
(iii) and mourning!

In fact we do find God forgiving sins by blessing Joel’s community with abundance of crops production:

“…Have pity on your people, LORD. Do not let other nation despise us and mock us by saying, “Where is your God?’” Then the LORD showed concern for his land; he had mercy on his people. He answered them: “Now I am going to give you corn and wine and olive-oil, and you will be satisfied. Other nations will not despise you. I will remove the locust army that came from the north and will drive some of them in to the desert.” (Joel 2: 17-20)

Observe that God of the OT did not forgive Joel’s community because they believed that one day Messiah (peace be upon him) would be allegedly crucified, but they were forgiven solely on God’s mercy when they pleaded to him for “pity”.

Another noticeable point is that locusts has always been one of the means through which the God of OT has wrecked His wrath on the wrong doers,

“You will sow plenty of seed, but reap only a small harvest, because the locusts will eat your crops.” (Deuteronomy 28:38)

“All your trees and crops will be devoured by insects.” (Deuteronomy 28:42)

“I will give you back what you lost in the years when swarms of locusts ate your crops. It was I who sent this army against you.” (Joel 2:25)

Nevertheless, God drove locusts away as a sign of His mercy and forgiveness on Joel’s community:

“I will give you back what you lost in the years when swarms of locusts ate your crops. It was I who sent this army against you.” (Joel 2:25)

However, Paul’s influence makes Trinitarian apologists like Sam Shamoun claim that Christ’s (peace be upon him) vicarious death was the only way their sins can be absolved:

“In the first place, the very same Gospels, which these dawagandists pervert in order make them say something contrary to the intended meaning of the inspired authors, are the very same writings which go out of their way to affirm that Jesus’ vicarious death is both necessary and foundational for salvation.” (Was Jesus’ sacrificial death necessary for the forgiveness of sins?)

However, contrary to what Paul teaches and Shamoun’s claim, God of the OT had entirely different concepts for the forgiveness of sins and subsequent salvation.

For OT Prophets (and their community) Christ’s (peace be upon him) vicarious death was not at all required, let alone, “foundational for salvation”, since their sins were always welcomed to be forgiven as we saw above how Joel’s community was forgiven!

If Jesus’ vicarious death is (really) both necessary and foundational for salvation then how was Joel’s community forgiven without it? Seems it was not so “foundational” for them.

Consider another offer of forgiveness. This time the community of OT Prophet Ezekiel (peace be upon him) was to be forgiven without Jesus’ (peace be upon him) alleged sacrifice: 

“Now, mortal man, I am making you a watchman for the nation of Israel. You must pass on to them the warnings I give you. If I announce that an evil man is going to die but you do not warn him to change his ways so that he can save his life, then he will die, still a sinner, and I will hold you responsible for his death. If you do warn an evil man and he does not stop sinning, he will die, still a sinner, but your life will be spared.”

Individual Responsibility

The LORD spoke to me. “Mortal man.” he said, “repeat to the Israelites what they are saying: We are burdened with our sins and the wrongs we have done. We are wasting away. How can we live? Tell them that as surely as I, the Sovereign LORD, am the living God, I do not enjoy seeing a sinner die. I would rather see him stop sinning and live. Israel, stop the evil you are doing. Why do you want to die?

“I may warn an evil man that he is going to die, but if he stops sinning and does what is right and good – for example, if he returns the security he took for a loan or gives back what he stole – if he stops sinning andfollows the laws that give life, he will not die, but live. I will forgive the sins he has committed, and he will live because he has done what is right and good. And your people say that what I do isn’t right! No, it’s their way that isn’t right. When a righteous man stops doing god and starts doing evil, he will die for it. When an evil man gives up sinning and does what is right and good, he has saved his life. But Israel, you say that what I do isn’t right. I am going to judge you by what you do.” (Ezekiel 33: 7-11, 14-20)


The verses teach the following:


(1)No matter how big the sins and wrongs be, “Life can be saved” or in other words, forgiveness/salvation can be achieved by 
(2) turning away from sins, doing good deeds and 
(3) following the “Law that give life”, (in other words “law” is not a “curse” as Paul erroneously assumes (c.f. Galatians 3: 13) but a blessing) and then 
(4) God “will forgive the sins they have committed”.

If God is/was willing to forgive even heavy burden of sins by virtue of His attribute, sinner’s repentance, acts of good deeds and obedience to Law – then was it required for Ezekiel’s community to believe in any vicarious atonement which wasallegedly going to take place thousands of years later? Or, was it required for any person to later “volunteer” himself for crucifixion for sins of others?


It is not surprising that rather than any mention of vicarious atonement, Bible compilers gave the sub-heading to these passages as “Individual Responsibility”– not Christ’s (peace be upon him) responsibility to bear the burden of others!

Taken From

The Bible is a book of Love?

Is the Bible truly a book of Absolute Love and Life(free of putrid things)?


How many times have you heard fellow Christians calling the Qur’an “the Book of Death and destruction” ? If I had a penny for all the times I’ve heard that..hmm..I may just be able to purchase a nice villa in Vienna by now…

The famous Irish playwright George Bernard Shaw said about the Bible:

” The Bible is the most dangerous book on earth. Keep it under lock and key. Your child must not have access to it”


Christian Missionary : The Qur’an is filled with death and killings. The Bible is a Glorious book of Love, free from death and destruction. It is about love and compassion!

Death and Killings in the Bible(s) VS. in the Qur’an

The BIBLE(s)

Genesis 19:26 = 1 killed

Genesis 38:7 = 1 killed

Genesis 38:10 = 1 killed

Exodus 32:27-28,35 = 3000 killed

Leveticus 10:1-3, Numbers 3:4 = 2 killed

Leveticus 24:10-23 = 1 killed

Numbers 15:32-36 = 1 killed

Numbers 16:27 = 12 + killed

Numbers 16:35 = 250 killed

Numbers 16:49 = 14, 700 killed

Numbers 25:9 = 24 000 killed

Numbers 31:1-35 = 90 000+ killed

Joshua 7:10-12 = 5 + killed

Joshua 8:1-25 = 12 000 killed

Joshua 10:24-26 = 5 killed

Judges 1:4 = 10 000 killed

Judges 3:15-22 = 1 killed

Judges 3:28-29 = 10 000 killed

Judges 7:2-22 = 120 000 killed

Judges 14:19 = 30 killed

Judges 15:14-15 = 1000 killed

Judges 16:27-30 = 3000 killed

Judges 20:35-37 = 25 100 killed

Judges 20:44-46 = 25 000 killed

1 Samuel 6:19 = 50 070 killed

1 Samuel 14:12 = 20 killed

1 Samuel 15:32-33 = 1 killed

1 Samuel 25:38 = 1 killed

2 Samuel 6:6-7 = 1 killed

2 Samuel 12:14-18 = 1 killed

2 Samuel 21:6-9 = 7 killed

2 Samuel 24:13 = 70 000 + killed

1 Kings 13:1-24 = 1 killed

1 Kings 20:28-29 = 100 000 killed

1 Kings 20:30 = 27 000 killed

1 Kings 25:35-36 = 1 killed

2 Kings 1:2-4, 17 = 1 killed

2 Kings 1:9-12 = 102 killed

2 Kings 2:23-24 = 42 killed

2 Kings 7:17-20 = 1 killed

2 Kings 9:33-37 = 1 killed

2 Kings 17:25-26 = 3 + killed

2 Kings 19:35 = 185 000 killed

1 Chronicles 13:15-17 = 500 000 killed

2 Chronicles 13:20 = 1 killed

2 Chronicles 14:9-14 = 1000 000 killed

2 Chronicles 21:14-19 = 1 killed

Ezekiel 24:15-18 = 1 killed

Acts 5:1-10 = 2 killed

Acts 12:23 = 1 killed

TOTAL KILLED : 2, 270, 365 + KILLED or in words TWO MILLION TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED SIXTY FIVE KILLED


The QUR’AN

28:79-81 = 1 killed

11:41 = 2 killed

66:10 = 1 killed

TOTAL = 4 or in words FOUR

A Brief hypothetical Exchange between an avid Christian missionary with a Muslim

Christian Evangelist : Sir, your Qur’an is filled with bloodbath, death and destruction!

Muslim : Sir, please take a close look at your own book before you want to point fingers and here’s a list of all the beautiful things your Bible says God has done. Thank you.

Christian Evangelist : *Eyes and mouth wide open..too overwhelmed to speak or do anything, so much so that his mouth kept wide open even when a huge fly flew into it*

THE PRURPOSE OF THIS NOTE IS TO SHOW THAT WE SHOULD NOT CRITICIZE OTHER RELIGION!!!
Taken From