Is it moral to profit from the murder of an innocent man? If you accept that the person is murdered to give you everlasting life aren’t you just as guilty of the crime?
If a man said to his son, let them murder you and I forgive all of them their debts to me. What would you think of that man? That he is crazy? An egomaniac? Yet when it suits you, you celebrate the murder of an innocent man just you can be forgiven by what you know rationally as being an egomaniac.
What does a god need a blood sacrifice for, just so he can do what you and I can do without one, forgive?
If you accept everlasting life under those conditions can you call yourself a moral being? Doesn’t it seem like Christianity is one of the most selfish religions in the world?
I agree with you.
Really it would be a very immoral act by any standards; but this Jesus never believed in; this philosophy is wrongly invented by Paul and cruelly continued by the Church; in this sense Paul and the Church are both anti-Christ. They have nothing to do with Jesus or Mary; they were peaceful and loving persons; couldn't think of this immoral philosophy or act.
Who can know the mind of God?
We look at things,everything from our perspective, but whose to say that is the only perspective ,insight ,intelligence out there?
Do you allow others to take your punishment for you? Do you think it is moral?
God set the standard. Not me. You would need to take that up with the Judge of all Judges
No. It is your choice. You have free will. Do you accept that someone has died so you do not have to pay the price for sin?
You celebrate it, don't you?
I want your opinion. Is it moral to accept someone else paying for your sin? Seriously. And tell me why you think it is.
Slarty, Do you feel good picking on christians?
Am I picking on you by telling the truth? I never considered that picking on people. When did you start considering telling the truth picking on people? When you discovered you don't like the truth?
Are you a moral person? I doubt it, I bet you have lied and cheated and done other sorts of sins in your life.
Jesus was moral-he never sinned, he is God.
It is not for us to decide what will save us. Our minds have been polluted with sin, we cannot come to the saving knowledge of God's grace without him. And he says that the only way we can be saved is if we believe in him.
How do you know his morals are not different from yours? Some people think that abortion is moral others think that it is not.
Jesus never sinned?
Deuteronomy 13:9 states that you must kill anyone who tries to lead you away from god.
Jesus didnt kill anyone therefore he is a sinner.
You display a complete lack of understanding of the purpose of the Deuteronic law and the culture for which it was written, and the complete change in culture that had occured by the time Jesus walked about.
Oh really? So you think that just because it was 2000 years ago and civilisation was different to what it is now that it was morally acceptable to KILL anyone who challenges your belief?
How far will you go to defend this nonsense?
4000odd years ago when Israel was coming out of Egypt, they were a slave people with no idea of how to be a nation, no idea of governance, and surrounded by pagan nations. God gave them a harsh set of laws to try to knock them into shape, to bring a coherence to them, and to stop them going astray after foreign gods which otherwise would have brought division and ultimate disintegration of the fledgling nation. 2000 years later they were established as a people and moved on culturally. No need to kill anybody as you say.
Initially blind faith in the law was needed, but later an understanding of the law and what it was aiming to achieve as the people had developed was much more relevant. Picture post-exilic Israel as like children, and in Jesus time as adults.
Oh right. So if you have 100 children, and half of them dont believe what you want them to believe, it is perfectly acceptable for half to kill the other half that dont believe in order for your preferred belief to be dominant.
So you think it was a good thing that christians went round the world killing millions of people just because they didnt believe the bible.
I think first of all, you need to understand that you are a human being, and all human beings are sinners (except one--Jesus).
God. Is the ruler of the universe, he decides what is moral and what is not. It is not moral to blaspheme against the one almighty God. In fact, it is not even moral to say you do not believe in him.
You ask how far I will go to defend this truth...I will die for it if necessary
Not moral to say I dont believe in him? Thats not even my fault. I cant force myself to believe in things. Can you force yourself to believe in santa? Then why on earth would an ALL LOVING god punish you for not believing something?
Thats not moral. Morals are subjective. WE decide what is moral.
It was moral 2000 years ago to kill people but not now? Is'nt god never changing? It sounds to me like the book was made up and written by men from a changing society.
It was moral to them to kill others but now WE think it is not moral to kill others, WE say "the old testament doesnt count anymore".
YOU decide what is moral and what isnt. The bible tells you to do good AND bad but YOU decide what to take note of and what to ignore.
You agree with thou shallt not kill but you dont agree with killing others. How did you decide? The bible doesnt say the OT is not relevant anymore, in fact mark 5 states that Jesus did NOT come to change the law "not a jot nor a title".
sorry, man... God decides the rules. If you created a world you would have the right to decide the rules...thankfully you can't create an earth and God did, and God is holy.
Are you mad at God for something? because he loves you wants to give you a chance.
Im not mad at god because I dont believe he exists. Getting mad at something I dont believe to exist would be silly wouldnt it?
What bothers me, is that you WORSHIP such a being AND claim that he is all loving, all powerful, and just.
I WORSHIP him AND claim that he is all loving, all powerful, and just, because I know in my heart (and in my head) that it is true.
It changed my life, if you had the same experience, it would change yours too...I'll post a hub about sometime.
So you think the action of drowning an entire planet including babies and children is loving and just.
That makes you sick by societies standards.
Society doesn't have very high standards. If they did do you think they would abort so many babies?
You lack understanding. I wrote a hub "Rights vs Morals". Please do read it.
The moral standard YOU think should be for all, is unattainable.
You're right, it is unattainable. We couldn't live up to it, which is why God sent his Son Jesus for us, because Jesus could live up to it!
It is by the power of Christ that we are able to do what we do. Yes, we still make mistakes, but God gives us second chances.
hey, can you send me the link to your "Rights vs Morals" hub somehow
<scratches head> Wait a minute...It is ok for god to kill all the first borns of Egypt, Kill how many people (including babies) in the flood and the various conflicts so that the isrealites could claim their promised lands...And society has low standards because of abortions? Isn't that the pot calling the kettle....
EDIT: By the way...How many of those women having the abortions or doctors conducting them or the politicians condoning the practice, claim to be some form of Christian or other religious believer.
It's God's universe. All the firstborns of Egypt did not have to be killed. It was the parents choice, the could have covered their door posts with blood, they chose not to and suffered the consequences of it.
Same thing for the flood, it was man's disobedience that led them to destruction.
Society still has low standards because of abortions.
Just because a religious person is involved in conducting an abortion doesn't condone it. Religious people can be wrong.
Do you kill your kids when they don't listen? You can always have more and teach them differently, to try to prevent them from not disobeying. God did it and if he wants you to be like him why can't you do it as well?
It is wrong to kill another human, no matter who is doing it or for what reason they try to justify it.
With that being said, I will still defend myself and others from harm. I will defend my country and the freedoms we enjoy. But, that still does not make killing another human right. I don't claim to be error free, but then I don't attempt to explain or justify why something that is wrong should be considered "ok" because it is justified by your standards.
Most Americans have a serious issue with how the Middle Eastern cultures do things, because we don't agree with them and feel they are going against basic human rights. And the Middle East doesn't agree with how we do things here in our country. We get all up in arms when they come over here and try to "change" things, but yet don't understand why they get mad at us when we try to change them. (we are only trying to help we say). Get off your high horse, stop being a hypocrite, and call a spade a spade. We are just as guilty, if not more so, as those we accuse of having faults. We should know better, well at least we claim that we do, but in the end we are all committing the same "sins", we just use some lame excuse to justify our hypocrisies. And that somehow makes it ok to do.
Attempting to justify actions of god using a standard that we ourselves are not held to or permitted to follow is just hypocrisy. Do as I say not as I do. Your own kids learn by watching your actions. "Your son grabs a hammer and tries to pound in nails into the board like his daddy does." Everyone complains about the "evil" in the world. The killing, stealing, wars, and various other "sins", guess what, those are all traits that humans have been taught by "god".
Each of us have our own beliefs about "god". And each of us feels that our "religion" has standards for the good of all. But, the bottom line is...those are personal beliefs only and cannot be felt the same way by everyone else. Most of us blindly follow a belief system, with no clue as to what it actually is, where it came from or what changes was made during its existance.
It is hard for one to claim to be Christian, for example, unless they embody all the traits that a christian should be. And then there is the issue of what kind of christian are they? Are they Baptist Christians, Lutheran Christians, Catholic Christians, ETC.;say what you want about the "true" christian, but they all claim to be christian and to date, I have not met a single one who can give me the definition of a "true" christian that matches, even somewhat remotely, to what another says.
I hear this as well..."I am a christian, I just don't actively practice" -raises the BS flag- If you don't practice or participate, you are not a christian. Basketball players who no longer play basketball, are they still basketball players? No. they was at one time, but now they are businessmen or what ever profession they are currently in.
I'll stop here. I am going to have to put the rest of my thoughts on this into a hub.
Do you kill your kids when they don't listen? You can always have more and teach them differently, to try to prevent them from not disobeying. God did it and if he wants you to be like him why can't you do it as well?
Pharoah had Gods people as slaves.
God intervened on behalf of His children,compassion for the oppression for His people were suffering at the hand of a dictator.
(Sound familiar ,doesnt it)
Pharoah had many chances to listen and free the Hebrews.
God via Moses tried to reason many times,each time the confrontation was more severe.
Each time Pharoah refused ,he almost enjoyed the battle at the expensive of innocent people.
(Note here ,Pharoahs decision)
and the conquences of that decsision.
Then he freed the slaves.
If he had freed them earlier ,no deaths
Peaceful solution all round -right?
Do you believe that people should be punished for their sin?
If people aren't punished for their sins they will persist in doing more and more evil.
What is your definition of Holiness?
What is your definition of God?
Do you believe there is a right or wrong standard?
(I'm just trying to get where you're coming from)
So, are you saying people should be punished by other people for sinning?
I believe people should be punished for thier crimes. (sin is something attached to a perception of wrong).
Holiness- Something that has the most holes??? Has religious meanings only...So my choice of definition would be...something that "I" consider to be sacred.
God- My definition of god is my own opinion and not something I am willing to debate over.
And I believe that each culture has set standards...And each one can be considered right or wrong based on who is doing the judging. Personally, I'll live by my standards.
I will not knowingly break any of the laws we have in our culture.
I will continue to treat those around me with respect.
I will continue to assist those in need.
I will continue to honor others rights and freedoms of beliefs and opinions, even if I don't agree with them.
do you think doing these things makes you a good person?
Assuming that you are talking to me, seeing as you replied to yourself for the questions you asked me.
No I don't think those things make me a good person...I know I am a good person...The only difference between me and anyone who claims to be a "true christian" is how we view the spiritual facets of life. And the other, is the fact that I don't feel the need to put others down or place them beneath me because they have different beliefs than I do. If they are true to themselves and can honestly say they have a completely clear conscience with the life they are living, who am I to say they are wrong.
I am pro abortion for the following reasons.
1. The feutus is unable to feel anything and is totally unaware of its existance. Dont try to tell me any different, I know, I was one once.
2. Orphanages are filled to capacity and children are growing up in them without any loving parents. That is not good for the child and often results in them feeling unwanted, neglected and often results in self detriment and suicide.
3. In countries where abortion is illegal, women and sometimes pregnant children are forced to give birth to the baby and bring it up in terrible circumstances which often results in pain and suffering of the child and more often then not, death.
My reasons for abortion are based on pain and suffering.
What are your reasons against it? I really do hope they are not just because the bible tells you to.
(Oh and dont forget to answer the other post from someone else about god commanding the death of babies.......)
Life begins at conception not when someone tells you it does.
Wow..because you were once one -incredible
Right, so evidently you care more about what the bible says about "life" and less about the actual pain and suffering of the individual.
"Life begins at conception"
Sperm isnt alive?
Im not talking about when life is thought to begin. Im talking about pain and suffering.
Is it wrong to kill a sperm because of the pain and suffering that it feels?
Whats the difference between a sperm and a feutus? A feutus hasnt fully developed a brain yet to feel pain or know suffering.
Are you defending this just because the bible tells you to? You must have a motive of your own surely?
My motive is pain and suffering because I know that a feutus does not feel pain or suffer because its brain is not fully developed yet.
I am pro-life for the following reasons.
1. The fetus, is a human being, from the moment of conception. The fetus is totally aware of its existence. (I don't have memories from when I was one years old, but does that mean I wasn't in existence, same thing for you, obviously you don't remember when you were a fetus.) Because I was once a fetus I would not wish the death of any other fetus. Life is valuable. Often when abortions are conducted the baby struggles and makes noises trying to get away from what is destroying him.
2. Abortion is not the solution to over-flowing orphanages. There are many people that are not able to have children that would love to adopt. The problem is that the state makes it so difficult to adopt that the children aren't being adopted and loved. You're right, this is not good for the children, but that doesn't condone killing them. Every child deserves a chance at life, and there are plenty of people out there to love them.
3. Often in countries where abortion is illegal women and pregnant children are pregnant because of immorality. The issue of sexual abuse, rape, and immorality should be focused on. You shouldn't try to cover one sin with another. If you want to avoid the pain and suffering maybe it is the abusers that should be killed, but not the innocent babies.
My reasons for life are based on love, pain, suffering, and moral decisions.
Well said. I believe that people using the crappy adoption situation in this country as an umbrella to hide under in order to justify the killing of an INNOCENT BABY is a bunch of crap. There are plenty of people out there who have been waiting for years to adopt a baby.
The Bangladeshi state does not make it difficult to adopt. Neither does the Romanian state. Clearly your point is moot and irrelevant to the countries where foster homes are the biggest problem.
Completely irrelevant. We're not discussing the causes for pregnancy we are discussing abortion.
Rubbish. The ONLY reference you made to pain and suffering was for that of the feutus and there is ZERO evidence for that.
Your reasons for being against abortion are because the bible tells you to. That much is very clear since you cant even provide valid reasons and also avoid the point in question by trying to steer the discussion onto pregenancy.
You have a nerve really.
I have read your posts and questions and emotive responses on how terrible you think God is murdering people,then you say
Kill the fetus,they dont even know they exist?
How hypocritical is that!!
I experienced what the medical people call a 'missed abortion' or spondanous abortion.
Yes the emotional pain was overwhelming,but I know I will see them again.
All life is precious.
The fact that sin entered into the world is whose fault?
Thats right -mankind.
So if youre going to point any fingers and play the blame game ,I suggest you start there.
Nonsense, the brain needs to be developed in order for awareness to take place, hence it is impossible for a fetus to be aware from the moment of conception. In fact, it isn't even a fetus at that point as the fetus does not even start developing until week 11.
Judged on that premise ,life is expendible to you.
What gives you the right to choose that?
Nonsense, the brain needs to be developed in order for awareness to take place, hence it is impossible for a fetus to be aware from the moment of conception
And your point would be?
Just because a fetus doesn't feel anything doesn't make him less of a human being.
Some people are born with a nerve disorder, they cannot feel pain. Do you think it would be right to kill them?
Hippy, the reason why I pointed out pregnancy is because that is what brings about abortion. Let's try to deal with the root issue here. If we get it at its root then we won't have to worry about the rest.
What about sperm? Does sperm have rights too? I base my opinion on abortion based on the fetus not feeling pain and not suffering. You base yours on what? Your opinion as to what constitutes life and your belief that the bible tells you it is wrong to kill?
That seems to me like you ae a robot doing what the bible says and not deciding for yourself.
Are you forgetting the part about suffering? Mental distress is suffering too you know. Of course it isnt right to kill a disabled person.
The root issue is not the topic of debate here though. Since there is unwanted pregnancy in the world, abortion needs to be discussed. Wishful thinking about abolishing unwanted prenancy is not beneficial.
The root issue should be the topic of debate. If it is not then we will get nowhere. It makes me wonder how many women you have made pregnant.
No, I'm not forgetting the part about suffering. Suffering is a fact of life though. Since there is sin there will be suffering. We don't have to inflict the suffering though on innocent babes.
No, the sperm doesn't have rights. It is not until conception, because on its own the sperm cannot make a baby.
What's funny is that I have barely mentioned anything from the Bible and you are accusing me of being a robot who does everything it says. Well, just so you know I don't do everything that it says I struggle, I sin. I know I'm not perfect. But I try and God is patient.
The root issue is another debate entirely. We are discussing abortion. I see you are being insulting already? How humble of you.
Then why ask me if I think it is ok to kill someone who cant feel pain?
I agree we shouldnt inflict suffering on babies. A feutus is not a baby though.
On its own a baby cannot make a baby. You're prerequisites for life are astonishing and ridulous. Are you making them up as you go along?
Sperm is alive. It is animated. It grows. It dies.
The root issue is entirely the same debate.
I'm sorry if I insulted you, that wasn't my point.
I asked you why I thought it is ok to kill someone in pain because that is what seems to be your definition of a person (someone who feels pain).
A fetus is a baby inside a womb. I know you don't like the Bible, but in Genesis it describes Esau and Jacob struggling inside of their mother's wombs. That sounds like a person to me, not just a clump of cells.
On its own a man can't make a man and a woman can't make a woman. I don't see what you're getting at there.
The sperm may be alive, but on its own it is not a human being.
Are you serious? You can't take biblical verses to account for a biological phenomenon. You need to use biology, instead.
Frogtalks 3 points have nothing at all to do with pain and suffering yet you think he was well stated?
He said fetus's struggle to get away from what is trying to kill them. You do know that babies have to learn how to use their muscles after they are born?
He completely ignored the fact that children are suffering and shifted the point of focus onto something else.
You have been blindsided. Maybe you are baised to side with him for religious reasons?
Well the planet does not belong to a no show invisible entity full of hate and loathing, that is a certainty. Read your bible, it's all there for anyone who can read.
I've read it, thankfully the God of the Bible isn't full of hate and loath. What the Bible says is very true, "We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." Thankfully we have a Savior who was willing to pay for our rebellions.
Thanks but was waiting for the polar bear that thinks hes a duck to answer.
Cuz it was his turn for a change
Why does it matter who's planet you think it is? If your child is living in your house does that give you the right to muder them?
If I create a world in a test tube I have the right to do with it what I like?
If these beings I create are sentient; if they feel emotion and pain and love etc. Do I really have the moral right to do what I want with them? Can I find a way to keep torturing the ones I think are doing wrong for eternity? For things like not believing I exist?
If a scientist was ever found to be actually doing that, don't you think you would be one of the first to say what a sadistic pig he is?
No, my friend. A god has no more moral right to do just anything at all to his creation than you have to do just anything at all to your kids.
If you think so than I question whether you know what morality is.
God is just in what he does. He is a perfect just God and he will not punish people without good reason. At the same time though he will do what glorifies him the most. So we have a God who is holy, loving, just, and he glorifies himself through his actions.
I don't think it would be moral to let people go without punishment. God provides a way out though. If someone is suffering in hell it is because they have rejected the salvation God is offering to them.
God does not take delight in the punishment of the wicked. He wants all men to be saved.
You find someone who glorifies himself above all a virtuous person?
If god did not delight in torturing people he wouldn't have made hell, and he wouldn't make stupid petty rules that show how egotistical he is, and call them sins.
Do you really think it is such a great sin not to believe he exists that it warrants eternal torture?
What you see as just punishment is cruelty beyond belief. Christianity has a really warped sense of right and wrong.
Hell was created for the devil and his angels. God does not send anyone to hell. Those who reject Jesus have chosen to send themselves with their own choice. It's not God's fault if one choose to go there. We all need to be responsible for our own behavior.
You dont choose not to believe in a ridiculous story. You just dont believe it because it doesnt sound plausible.
What if you found out when you died that the Hindu god Vishnu was actually real and he punished you for eternity for not believing in him and he told you that you sent yourself there?
You'd think he was an arsehole wouldn't you? Would you blame yourself?
But thats not what God does ,so no,its not sound reasoning.
If you were God ,without sin, how would you keep sin out of heaven?
What does god not do? Why would a god need to keep sin out of heaven? You limit your god. It's amazing.
LOLOLOL How brave of yer ter sez it wot god sez innit.
Soooo Brave of yer. Who iz yer agin?
Little wonder your beliefs cause so many wars.
So u iz responsoble fer hidin yetr identititty and sezin wot god sez we gon be hurt bad innit.
Becoz we dint feer wot u sed god sed.
No wonder you cause so many fights.
What good would knowing WOC 's true identity do exactly?
kiwi, I will be awaiting his response. I have made a great choice not to display my name. Mark might decide to stalk me.
Yes, we all need to be responsible for our own behavior. And yet you allow Jesus to be murdered so you do not have to be responsible for own sin. Again, you admit that it is immoral.
For me to reject Jesus or god I would have to know with certainty they exist. Then depending on their true character I would be in a position to choose to accept them or reject them. Without knowing for certain they exist, how do you expect anyone to make a choice?
There is no choice to be made. It's like me telling you that unless you accept the invisible pink squirrels as your saviors right now, your soul will be chewed for eternity.
Would you think I was crazy? You telling me your story is just as crazy to me. There is no choice unless your god shows itself, and it isn't likely to that since it isn't likely that it or my pink squirrels exist.
No one on this thread, or any living person today, ..."allowed Jesus to be murdered so we don't have to be responsible for our own sin." Jesus himself prevented his disciples from stopping his death on the cross. He knew that in order to provide salvation for the entire human race that a sacrificial death must take place. He chose willingly to give up his position in heaven and his life on earth so that YOU and I have the opportunity to choose eternal life. Those who choose not to accept his death as payment for their sins are the ones who try to make his death seem as though it were insignificant.
Jesus did not die on the Cross; his life is more significant for the human beings; than his mythical death on the cross for sins of the Christians.
Why don't the Christians stop sinning and let Jesus escape a cursed death on Cross?
" He knew that in order to provide salvation for the entire human race that a sacrificial death must take place. "
Why? Is your god so limited it needs a device to help it forgive? Or is just cruel and blood thirsty? If you choose to have ever lasting life you accept that the murder took place for you and you are transfering the responsibility for your sin to an innocent, who was murdered by a tyrant egomaniac. I don't see that as being moral.
Funny how Jesus had anything to do with his death on the cross when it was the Romans who arrested him, tried and convicted him to crucifixion. How did Jesus have any say in that matter? His disciples could no more prevent that than anyone else.
Sacrificial death? Are you folks savages or something? You still need to sacrifice people to jump start religious belief? How utterly barbaric.
God is not a tyrant egomaniac.
All the rules were set forth at the beginning.
The penalty for sin is death.
Since all mankind has committed sin at some point in their life (except Jesus), all must pay the price for their sin, which is death. If we did not sin, there would be no need for a savior.
But since we have sinned it is us, all who have sinned, that made it necessary for Jesus to die on the cross.
Sinful man put Jesus there, not God.
Just as sin entered the world through one man, Adam;
In Gods mercy and love the plan of salvation was set up so the penalty for sin was satisfied through the death of one man, Jesus. Because Jesus life was perfect he was victorious over death and was resurrected into eternal life.
All who accept and believe that Jesus death was justification for their sin will receive the gift of eternal life.
When you understand that Jesus willingly died in your place to satisfy the penalty for sin out of love, you can see he is not a God of tyranny but a God of compassion and mercy.
Who said all sin no matter how small or how large is to paid by death? Non-other than your god, right? So he can't say, gee fellas, I changed my mind. If you ask forgiveness and really mean it we can figure something out."
No. He has be theatrical about it and demand blood.
Besides which no one gets out of here alive anyway. We are not immortal.
"Sinful man put Jesus there, not God."
You better make up your mind, my friend. Either god planned this or men killed him. If god planned the murder it doesn't matter who killed him, it was a hit planned by god. The men that nailed him to the cross should be heroes. He wasn't going to nail himself to a tree was he? They did it because of gods plan, or your religion is a lie. You can't ave it both ways. God planned it AND the people that carried out gods plan sinned. That's absurd. It is one or the other. Which do you choose?
If the label on a household cleaning product is clearly marked as poisonous, would you intentionally ingest it? You are free to use it according to the directions on the label. However, if you abuse that privilege with a full understanding of the consequences of your abuse and use it to wash your eating dishes and someone dies, who is at fault, you or the manufacturer?
God is not guilty of any wrong doing because He is the creator of the rules.
In His infinite wisdom and mercy He established a plan of salvation to provide forgiveness to those who break the rules. That plan included Jesus WILLINGLY accepting the penalty of all sin that has been committed by mankind. Therefore the rule (penalty for sin is death) was fulfilled through Jesus death on the cross. He WILLINGLY accepted the responsibility for all our mistakes. He was worthy of that payment because he committed no sin.
As you stated, "...the people that carried out gods plan sinned." Yes, but their sins condemned them to death long before the crucifixion of Jesus. Jesus had the power to stop them, but he knew in order for them to be forgiven of their sins, He must die. So He endured the beatings, mockery, and suffering so that they, as well as you and I could be forgiven.
Those who crucified Jesus did not do it to satisfy Gods plan, they did it because they failed to believe Jesus was who He claimed to be and to satisfy their selfish desire for power and position. Jesus did not sin, therefore He was not under the rule, and did not deserve to die.
The great controversy at the very heart of the Christian religion is whether God's rules proclaim justice and mercy, or selfishness and tyranny.
In order to prove the moral integrity and justice of God, the rules cannot be broken or modified to satisfy the whims of the guilty. Rules have consequences, and even God himself must abide by them in order to demonstrate His justice.
God's plan was not to (murder) nail Jesus to the cross. His plan was; if man sins, innocent blood must be shed as reconciliation for your sin. No sin means no blood would need to be shed. If mankind had committed no sin, Jesus would not have needed to die on the cross. Therefore, because of sin, mankind has figuratively murdered Jesus, not God.
So to you god is never guilty of wrong doing because he is god and defines wrong doing? Must be nice to be able to get away with anything and never be seen as guilty of anything.
But you admit that if a man did what god does he would be considered a tyrant?
So why not say what the Jews said? He is both good and evil but he is god and we can't do anything about it. Best appease it lest you piss it off. lol...
I don't buy it. Your god acts like a tyrant so he is a tyrant. Don't sugar coat it.
You are making excuses for its behaviour. The only reason anyone is guilty of murdering Jesus is that they agree to it by accepting that he died so you do not have to pay for your own sins.
I refuse to do that because it is immoral.
Your god could have done things any way it wanted to. It did not need blood. It was theatrics.
Well actually it was nonsense and Jesus died for nothing. But that's beside the point.
earnest, It doesn't take a miracle for a person to stalk someone.
And so another terrorist is born to defend his god that doesn't seem to be able to defend itself. How pathetic.
lol...don't you worry, my God can defend himself. One day your knees will bow and your tongue will confess that he is God.
Can he? So why would you feel the need to kill for him? Can't he do his own dirty work? Or is he like a mob boss?
Perhaps a god exists, but more likely he is just your fantasy. I won't need to confess that he is god, I"ll just state it as fact. And why would I be on my knees? According to you he's going to torture me anyway. You want me to just accept that?
Now, if he is a just and kind god he'll smile and say he's happy to see me, and he's glad he could finally prove to me he exists. We will have a laugh and go to the bar for a smoke and a drink and catch up.
If he is like you say he is, I'll spit in his face and he'll dump me in hell for eternity. I can't believe for a second that even were there a god, it would be anything like what you claim it to be. Your idea of satan is better than that.
I don't feel any need to kill for him.
It is not dirty work, would you call what Jesus did dirty work? He loved people! He healed them, he saved them from their sins, he brought people back to life. If you ask me that does not sound like dirty work! It sounds like love! And this same loving God wishes that no one will perish. He doesn't wish for you to perish. His desire is that you will repent of your sins and come to him, he offers salvation.
God is not a fantasy. I'm not going to prove it to you because I know he will. You will be on your knees because you will acknowledge him as God. I hope though that you will turn to God before it comes to that. It's your choice man, you can accept God's salvation for your sins or you can reject it. The latter results in torture.
The reason you exist is because he exists. God hates arrogance.
Why would you spit him in the face? I know for a fact that you won't though, Jesus has already taken spits in the face, when he's coming back he's coming back strong and mighty like a king!
It would be the height of arrogance for those who believe in their gods to threaten others with torture if they choose not to share your beliefs.
and I'm not doing that (in case you implying I was). I'm just telling the truth. It would be arrogant of me not to share the truth that I have.
But you can not even be certain a god exists. So you are not telling the truth, you are telling a speculative story. But you are convinced it is true through faith. How can anyone else take you seriously? It would be better to keep it to yourself or admit to us that it is just something that might be. To tell us that it is true with certainty is a lie, even though you don't mean it to be.
And you cannot be certain that a God doesn't exist.
You are correct in one thing though, it is by faith that I believe in God. However, it is also by faith that you believe there isn't a God.
I cannot tangibly prove to you that he does exist and you cannot tangibly prove to me that he doesn't exist.
However, I know in my heart (and in my head) that he does exist
It is quite natural to believe in the Creator-God; very un-natural not to believe Him. It is like doubting one's own existence.
No as I said, if I claimed god does not exist is a fact then I would be lying. But my lack of belief is not faith. It is a lack of faith. Not the same thing. I don't say your god does not exist. It might, just as bigfoot might exist. But don't believe it does nor do I believe it does not. I don't know. But I have serious doubts on both counts. Having doubts is not the same as having faith, right?
All I am saying is that Christians should be honest and admit they can't know, but think it does, rather than preach that it definitely does. That's a lie. Do you see what I mean?
No, it is actually arrogant that you share your truth in that you repeat threats. It would be the same thing if you decided to repeat Hitlers threats in his book, Mein Kampf to exterminate the Jews in the name of god, if that's what you believed to be the truth.
It is quite offensive for you to compare the teachings of Christ to the teachings of Hitler.
Followers could not be further apart.
It's quite offensive when you pretend to talk about science, too. I guess it sucks to be offended.
And yet, we can find them to be one and the same. Please remember, there are thousands of sects of Christianity, whether you choose to acknowledge them or not.
"I don't feel any need to kill for him. " Glad to hear it. So your admission that you would gladly die for him was meant in the sense of old style martyrdom? The kind where if you are persecuted you will die rather than recant your beliefs?
Current martyrs in the Middle East strap bombs to themselves. So I take it you don't mean that kind of martyrdom.
yes, I mean that kind of martyrdom...and not suicide martyrdom.
I'm not really that violent, in case you wer thinking I am
I am opinionated though and stick to what I believe is true... but I don't think you doubted that.
Nor do I think it is a bad thing. But if one is looking for truth, it is easier to find if you are open to evidence. Faith is useless with evidence. It isn't faith anymore if you know it is true. So if you want truth you have to not care what that truth might be. Have no stake in it. Have no faith in it.
I'm not just jumping to conclusions, it took a process to get me to believe what I believe. I believe there is evidence, not all evidence is as tangible as you wish it was but nonetheless their is evidence.
frogtalk, Amen. Every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus is Lord.
Lord of Lord ,and King of Kings
Glory Hal le lu jah!
Jesus ,Prince of Peace ~~Glory Hallelujah
His eye is on the Sparrow Earnest and His eye is on you
No fairy, no goblins no eye in the sky.
The problem is it would easy for me to go to him if I knew he existed and was really a good guy. The fact hat I do not makes it impossible for me to accept or reject him. I would reject him only on the basis that he is an egomaniac and not a good guy. If if I found out he was a nice god, I'd accept him. Either way I would accept that he exists.
But there is no proof. Telling me or others to go to him when there is no evidence that there is someone to go to is meaningless. Expecting that we choose him or reject him without proof that he exists is meaningless.
On can not make an informed choice nor any choice unless one actually knows what the choices are.
So if he wants me to accept him on the word of a book and it's believers, he'll have a long wait. At least till I"m dead and wake up.. lol... But I don't expect to wake up from death.
Now if he said that we should choose after we die, then he'd be being fair and just. Now it all sounds like a fantasy since he's a no show.
No, you have this life to decide. After this is judgment.
I just want you to know that I am not saying any of this out of hate towards you. I do not hate you, I want you to come to the understanding of saving grace. I don't want you to be punished for all eternity and neither does God, but the decision is yours.
Which god would that be again?
Have you ever considered that your religious beliefs have more to do with where you live than any other factor?
If you were born in a muslim country and your parents were muslim so would you be, if born in India you would be one of their religions.
Food for thought?
Gods doesnt judge like a man.
He will judge according to what the person knows to be right (or wrong)
But you heard the truth about Jesus ,what did you do?
Why not address the point made? Too truthful for you?
Do you believe you would be a christian if you were born to a muslim family in Saudi Arabia?
I know it is hard to confront, as it makes a mockery of all religious beliefs doesn't it?
No I wouldnt ,geeze mate it wasnt the lack of coffee after all
I did answer back there ,so really dont know why ya is grouchy?
I do get fed up when real questions that are uncomfortable are ignored time after time. It is a fair question, why not attempt to reply to what is said. You did not address my comment at all!
I don't see that as an honest answer. Think about how you were indoctrinated, then compare that to what indoctrination you would have received from a good muslim family in Saudi.
Although I did grow up in a Christian family, that is not what determined me becoming a Christian.
I had to choose for myself. (they didn't make me, I did) I had to discover what the truth was and then decide to live by it.
Maybe I would have been muslim if I grew up in a muslim home or maybe I would have been hindu if I grew up in a hindu believing home.
However, God works in people all over the globe and I still think he would have brought me to him, even if I were atheist.
Absolutely, it had everything to do with you being a Christian.
No, you did not make that conscious decision, it was made for you.
Yes, you would, just like you grew up in a Christian household and became a Christian.
That is how childhood religious indoctrination works.
Yes ,who can know the mind of God.
However I do agree that environment does have a positive ( or negative effect.
But once again ,that would limit God and he is Omnipotent and Omniscient.
Ive said it before and I'll say it again.
Being born in a garage -doesnt make one a car,but Im sure you'll be familiar with the environment
Yes, my parents faith greatly influenced me, but it wasn't my deciding factor.
Last year I went through a period of doubt and frustration about my beliefs. I wanted to know for myself if it was true.
I wrestled with it. I told my parents that I had to decide for myself whether this was true and even if it was true if I wanted to be a Christian for myself. They said it was okay, they didn't want to force me into anything. They said it was my decision.
I spent time thinking about it. Whether it was really true. I decided with absolute certainty that it was true, but then I had to decide whether I wanted to live under God and by God's rules. I knew that because Christianity were true that if I rejected it I would be the one at loss, but if I accepted it I would be saved, free!
Being born in a Christian family didn't make me a Christian, I had to become one.
Tell me your story, why do you believe what you believe?
okay okay, I gave you the fast forwarded version...yes, there were explanations for it.
The Bible was one explanation for it. The Bible is one of the oldest books in the history of mankind. And it is historically and scientifically accurate. Personally it is spiritually changing.
The world around me. The universe could not have just come about out of nothing. It was clearly intricately and orderly designed. There definitely had to have been a greater intelligent force behind that. The God of the Bible matches up perfectly to that greater intelligent force.
I asked God to show himself to me. Whereas I didn't receive a vision about him I saw him working in my life through several circumstances that could not have been chance. It was definitely God's providence.
He has shown to me that he is true, and I believe it because I have seen it.
No, the bible is not historically or scientifically accurate by any stretch of the imagination.
Actually, your god and your bible match perfectly with your misinformed opinions and claims about the world and the universe.
In other words, you have taken what you have perceived as an extraordinary event because you can't explain it other than by chance and have immediately assigned your god over all other alternative explanations as the reason and cause.
Please, stop providing empty arguments.
Tell me, in what particular ways is the Bible not historically or scientifically accurate?
What other explanations do you think there are to this extraordinary event?
So you didn't really respond to my question. How can you ask me to choose something I have no way of knowing is reality? Does that make sense to you?
What if I told you the invisible pink squirrels demand that you believe in them, or when you die they will chew your nuts for eternity. Your choice. To avoid this horror all you have to do is believe they exist.
Your telling me about an invisible god that wants me to believe it exists while I am alive because if I don't it will torture me eternally.
I'll believe your myth when you believe mine.
Ok, so how do you know there are invisible pink squirrels?
I know that there is a God because of the Bible. Not only that, I know there is a God because of the universe. The universe is ordered and amazing. It could not have just happened accidently. There must have been a greater intelligent force behind the creation of the world. That greater intelligent force is God.
My greatest foundation is the the Bible. Which I realize you won't like because you don't believe in its infallibility and inerrancy. But I do and that's what matters for me. You see the Bible is one of the oldest books that exists, not only that it is scientifically and historically accurate. If it is scientifically and historically accurate than there is a pretty good chance that it is true.
Apart from that I have seen God's work in my own life. Last year I went through a very difficult time, but it was as if God was there every moment of my way. I prayed and he answered. Some might call it chance, I call it God's providence. Chance doesn't happen that often but God's providence does. Doesn't mean he's always going to answer in the way I want him to, but it means that he has his best purpose in mind. In the end it will all be OKAY, even though that end might not be here on earth.
The bible isn't proof in and of itself, and any claiming it is, hasn't done their homework.
Hey Frog, be amazed, but don't be gullible.
Actually it didn't happen accidentally. It happened as a part of a normal cycle.
Not true at all.
Not actually, but YOU are attributing to a god you read in a book. A book you haven't researched.
Which actually weakens your position, because of you lack of knowledge about many things outside of the bible.
Of course it's infallible. It was written by man. Plain and simple.
Actually, since it matters to you so much, I'm not surprised that you won't do the research on it, so you have a better understanding. It's part and parcel of the ignorance of those who just read the bible and never mind about it's actual history.
Not all of it, so please don't make it all inclusive truth, because it's actually not. And, had you done the research, then you would know it.
You're missing a lot, and I mean, A LOT of information and that alone is a shame you can live with.
Really, do tell? Did you ask for something and then it magically appeared for you? Or did you ask for strength to get through a difficult time and then to your amazement, you got through it? If this is the case, then it was not a god that got you through it, it was your mindset that changed, which also changed your view. The only problem is that you attributed to a god. Ironically, if you actually knew more about yourself, then you wouldn't have had to ask for help. Another shame on you.
Yes, you open attribute things YOU DO to something else. Not a surprise.
Actually, that wouldn't be true and only would be subjective conjecture based on what you believe to be true. Unfortunate, it's not truth.
Purpose? His purpose?
Ah yes. But there is no chance in a world of cause and effect. However, god is the process of existence. Not conscious. There is no conscious god required.
I actually have provided more proof in what I have said than you have in anything you have said. You also jump to conclusions to quickly. Avoiding these two things will help you build a better case.
First of all, I have studied the Bible and its history. In fact Bible is one of my majors. So I do know what I'm talking about.
Secondly, how could it have happened in a normal cycle? What began the cycle. It had to have a beginning. If it didn't have a beginning it wouldn't have been in the condition it is today. We see scientifically that the universe is wearing out, not renewing itself. If it were a cycle than we would most likely see a renewal.
What particular things outside of the Bible do I lack knowledge about. I want (particular) things please.
Though it took 40 men to write the Bible. It was actually inspired by God. God gave them the words to say. That is what makes it infallible, not the fact that man wrote it down. No other work written is infallible, only the Bible. Which proves that there is something different about it. I haven't found anything that makes the Bible infallible. If you have please tell me what in particular it is.
You said I am missing A LOT of information, yet you didn't care to tell me what exact information I am missing. Please, do tell.
I will explain what God did for me in the difficult times, but you won't understand, because the Bible says that it is foolishness to those who don't believe. I asked God for stregnth, yes, and he gave it to me. I didn't have any stregnth at that time. But not only did God give me stregnth but his perfect timing was at work as well. My sister came to my college at just the right time that I needed her to, and that wasn't planned by any of us. Spring break had come just at the time that I was experiencing the most stress. That wasn't by chance. That was God. He kept me strong until that moment, and then he put the people around me at the right time to help lift me up. God works in supernatural ways, but it is not always the supernaturalness that we expect. He works through people and circumstances. One of the really hard nights I sensed that I was in God's presence. It was as if he was holding my head in his lap and stroking my cheek. That's how close he felt and I knew it was God. It couldn't have been anything else. There is nothing that I can attribute to myself, except my sin and brokenness.
Others go to the extreme and think that they are a god. That they have the power, when in reality they don't.
Yes, God's purpose. His purpose is to glorify himself.
Just as a pointer, if you reply to yourself, the person you are addressing wont know you have responded to them. Click on reply at the bottom of the post from the person you want to respond to.
Better my case? Try living completely in reality would you.
Apparently, you didn't learn anything other than that, which is why your present view is skewed. Again, you could have done more, but apparently not interested.
Oh, you're looking for that cause? Is that your point. Universes expand and collapse, expand and collapse, but the cycle takes more time that you can imagine, before a collapse happens.
I mean, if you really wanted to, the Universe itself would be it's own cause, because it expands and collapses, then expands.
I'm sure it has a beginning, just like everything has a beginning and end. Duality rules apply.
Actually, you would able to identify everything, wearing out and renewal. You appear to want all answers, but not willing to accept them. Not too ironic I guess.
How about history of humankind? How about Human development?
Conjecture and unproven. What I can say is proven, and maybe had you done the research, is that many of the books/gospels written by man were just that, written by man. Why they wrote it down? Has been figured(learned) out. It wasn't a god that inspired them. It was actually conscious thought that made them write what they did write. And, not all of the actually possessed the ability to write in the first place. So please.
Untrue, explained above.
Untrue, yet again. The first 5 books are from a completely different religion. So please.
If you had actually done the research, then you would know that the translation of the language originally used, didn't have words in the present language, so as to make the writing make sense. There were some words that didn't actually have words in present language, so words were left out, making things out of context on purpose.
Let ask you a question- When exactly did you realize you are alive? Did you know, almost ALL of Jesus' followers were completely unaware of their own existence? These people were and had been living their life, completely oblivious to their own existence. They lived completely through their mind(the right side of their brain).
I already answered this, but you fail in understanding self, so I guess it was all for nothing, with regards to you, but not for me.(if that boggles your mind, I wouldn't be too surprised)
Again, YOU are attributing something to a god, which I am sure you fail to realize something else. Not too shocking, but expected.
BS. You held yourself together.
Actually, it was your mind trying to find balance and it's unfortunate, you've still not found the right balance.
No you convinced yourself it was something that doesn't exist. Nice mind job on yourself.
Sin and Brokenness? Are you serious?
Actually, no god is required for living life or understanding it. Therefore, no god required.
And, you've been in the mind of a god?
Yes, you major in the bible and then use the bible to support the bible.
Scientifically, no one would know what you're talking about.
We can only do that if we don't use the bible as a reference to validate or refute it.
How very sinister. We have despots ruling over nations with the very same motive.
okay, I think we need to start taking things one step at a time...and let's start it with a new question space because it's getting difficult to look for the latest answer to the question. So I'll start a new question and then you can look for it and answer it. Sound good?
I found a book my attic that tells me about them. And some of my wires have been chewed.
The universe is due to the process of existence. Nature. No god required. There is no intelligence required for nature to work either.
Unfortunately the bible is not scientifically accurate. Historically it is not that it is accurate, it is that parts of it tell a perspective about history of the time it was written in. Places and names may be accurate just most novels use real places to set fictitious stories. I am not saying the bible is intentionally fictitious, it is perspective based. That is to say the people who wrote it were religious and attributed all manner of things to the god they believed in. A real god did not have to exist for them to do that. Their imagination would have done most of the work.
what have invisible pink squirrels done for you?
But, that's what YOU want, not what anyone else wants. Hence, the spreading of your gods message is what YOU want and not what others want.
Those who needed physical proof 2000 years ago didn't believe Jesus was who he claimed to be, so why do you think God would expect people to behave any differently today? He made an appearance once, and gave a lot of people exactly what they asked for yet they still didn't believe. How are you, or anyone else who denies His existence any different?
A real god would have no problem making everyone believe in no uncertain terms it is god. Come now. Don't limit your god's power.
It isn't about atheists, it's about the absence of your god and any evidence of it in reality. Were it real I'd know it. We all would. We couldn't help it.
The fact that their are atheists probably means no god exists, or it doesn't want us to know to it exists despite what Christians claim..
Funny actually, to claim what happened in the lives of two people you have never met or have any idea of what they did during their childhood, where the predictions are at opposite ends of a moral spectrum.
Do you bet me that? Sure. I've don't things I regret and some I have made up for some haven't. Is this an AA meeting? lol... But if you are a Christian you choose to accept the murder of an innocent instead of paying for your own sin. I wouldn't. Not even if I believed. It's immoral.
Can you explain why it is not immoral?
The thing is that when you think of morality, you think of it with respect to today's society. As for the murder of an innocent (Jesus), death is the way that you were forgiven from sins back in the ancient times. The reason people sacrificed animals because it was supposed to represent what YOU should be doing. Everyone should be killed because of their sinful lifestyles, they just killed animals instead. The reason that Jesus was sacrificed and the reason that He covered the sins of the world was because He was perfect. He was the perfect sacrifice. He did not need to sacrifice Himself because He was never born with sins (sin is passed down through the father - as was believed back then), and He never sinned throughout His life. But the reason that His death was so influential and powerful was because He rose from the grave 3 days later (therefore defeating death).
As to your question about morality, it was not only morally acceptable but morally necessary for Christ to have been sacrificed to cover the sins of the world. Because of that, anyone who calls Him by name and believes in Him will not perish but have everlasting life.
Another thought - God created the world and everything in it (including you (if you take this viewpoint)), why would He expect anything less than dedication to Him in our lives. Who gave you all your skills and abilities? Did you choose where you were born? Did you choose what family you were put in? Did you choose what language your were going to be born into? And if you think about it, where do you think our morals even came from? I put my money on God. Just a thought
Are you putting yourself as judge over God and the way He decides to run His business. Afterall, this world is His right? Shouldn't He have the right to set things up as He pleases. If you or I were God, we could do as we please...but since we are not, we have no right to judge His ways.
Furthermore, Christians are seen as troublemakers in these forums. But, I beg to differ. The troublemaker is not the Christian (for the most part). The troublemaker is man's own mind, trying to conceive the mind of God and His ways with their natural minds. The things of God are spiritually disscerned, therefore as long as you're looking at them from your natural state they will appear to you as they do.
I take it you don't like people asking questions? Yes I think we can judge god. The Jews did it and rightly so.
Is your judgement of God true or is it false? And where did you get this truth by which you judge God? And no, I do not oppose you asking questions. There's nothing wrong with that.
Because "he" is a myth, just like the 3 headed dog, tolerant religion and goblins.
I can only judge by what someone does. Can you not judge the characters in a book of fiction or non-fiction to be of sound moral fiber or not?
The bible is a book of mostly fiction. But be that as it may it portrays your god in a certain light. I can only judge by what it says about him since he never shows his face to the world
Do you jealousy is a good trait in a character? Ordering murders, is that a good trait? What if a character wanted to be worshiped, and demanded it on penalty of torture? Sound like a nice guy to you? Oh yes, the character in the story has his son murdered so he could forgive those indebted to him. Sounds like the guy is a bit nuts if you ask me. He puts snakes and poison trees in the kids playpen and then expects they will listen when he tells them not to play with them. Then curses the kids and throws them out of the house when they do. That's just for starters.
Read this bible just as a story it is easy to judge your god to be an egomaniac, a tyrant, a nut ball, pathetically immoral, and a host of other descriptive words you likely don't want to hear.
If you read such a story about a man you would say the same thing. But because it is supposedly about a god that can save you from itself, you will argue with me.
Wrong, it is our world, it belongs to all mankind.
Okay, we don't judge his ways, but at the very least, we can have coffee and donuts and discuss the ethical and moral implications of "his ways". Nothing wrong with that, is there?
This is actually maybe more a question of what a religion is in itself. For example - despite what anyone says, the bible was written by humans, and if for arguments sake you believe in Christ, I'm sure he'd have more than a bit to say about a) the bible, and b) some of the assertions made in 'His name'
Don't worry about the spammer Slarty, already flagged the profile of this genius.
The morality is the same throughout the OT, a megalomanic ranting full of threats. Psychologically unsound to say the least.
Let's start from this premise. IF you believe in a God (who may not be the only God, but is the God over all gods) who has let it be known that eternal paradise exists for you if you obey His commands (which are not random and arbitrary, but rather laid out for the good of all), and that God has made it known as well that disobeying those commands will result in you being shut out of that paradise eternally - then I suppose it is completely selfish, and this God is a megalomaniac.
If you understand that God to be who He says He is, however, a completely just AND a completely merciful God, you have yet another premise to work from. This God understands that you will fail in carrying out every one of his commands. There will be some you are able to keep and others that you will not due to temptation, weakness, simple ignorance, etc...Now, in His mercy, he can simply forgive and be done with it. But, in that case, His justice is not satisfied.
An example: You steal a $2500 ring from the jewelry store. You tell the judge you're sorry. He says, "Okay, then I will not sentence you to jail time, but you must make restitution to the jewelry store. Otherwise, you will be convicted and sent to jail."
Now, knowing that you cannot, in this case, make restitution for breaking His commands, and wanting to be merciful, this God above all gods, sends His Son to earth to make the only restitution that can be made - death. In accepting this mission, the Son agrees to take on every sin of every person who chooses to believe in Him as God's son, and die for those people. He CHOOSES to do this, mind you. It is not forced upon Him. This act of death on the part of the Son is accepted by God as restitution for the sins of all. Now that the justice of God has been satisfied, He is going to offer only mercy. To show evidence of this mercy, He is going to raise His Son from the dead to show that the gates of paradise are once again open to all, no matter what failures they have committed. All they need to do is believe.
What is so often missed in observing Christianity from the outside (or from the once inside, but now outside) is that it is not the murder of Christ that is celebrated. It is remembered, yes, and memorialized. BUT, it is His resurrection that is celebrated. The act of his death was selfless. It resulted in His resurrection, which is what allows the believer in Christ to be forgiven, without having to make restitution - not without being truly sorry, which the believer is perfectly capable of, but without having to die and live apart from God forever.
Now, the final premise is that you accept that gift from God and use it only as an eternal "Get Out of Jail Free" card and as license to do whatever you want regardless of the temporal consequences. THAT is where the mistaken belief comes in on the part of believers in Christ and non-believers alike. What should happen is that you use the freedom that you have in Christ to become as like Him as possible...as giving, as sacrificing, as loving, as kind, as compassionate, and as forgiving. There is not only no need to judge (because God's justice has been satisfied), but there is also no RIGHT to judge. Judgment is reserved for God alone, and as stated already, His justice has been satisfied.
I agree that this is the mostly accepted version of Christian Doctrine.
I am curious of something...Why, if I am the Just Judge, Jury and Executioner, would I pay a price for a crime (sin) that someone else committed, based off of freewill (choice)given them and who knew the punishment of those actions? And why do I issue the same punishment for all crimes (sin)?
Example: Gods Punishments
Crime(sin)- Premarital sex/adultery between consenting adults.
Punishment- Burn in Hell forever.
Crime(sin)- Rape of underage girl.
Punishment- Burn in Hell forever.
In the USA, we have a judicial system in place that awards punishments based on the severity of the crime and on the multiple offender or habitual criminal types.
I, understand the thought behind your post to mean:
God put the laws is place. Man broke laws. God gave man a method to atone for breaking the law (Animal Sacrifice). Man continued to break laws. God sent his only son to atone for man's unwilliness to abide by the law. Man does not feel attached to atonement, because it didn't come out of his pocket, still breaks laws. Man is unable to stop breaking laws, so must continuely ask for atonement (through forgiveness/dipping into the "pot" of the Sacrifice of Jesus).
So if the criminal, is unable to stop being a criminal, why is an atonement continually made available for them? What happens with your children, if you tell them what not to do, but allow them to continue to do it? They say, "I am sorry and I will try not to do it again", when they know full well that they will commit the same offence again, and Mom and Dad is going to let them get away with it.
If god is only showing mercy now, because of the sacrifice made by Jesus, then what is the purpose of asking forgiveness? The sacrifice has been made and all sins are covered. There is no need to ask forgiveness for something you have already been forgiven for.
Just my thoughts.
And one point, that I disagree with that you made, I think that the Death of Jesus has to be celebrated as well, for without the death, there can be no atonement or resurrection. If no death of Jesus, there is no forgiveness by grace, without the death, there is no resurrection or victory over death, which means no everlasting life.
My personal take (unpopular among most fundamentalists and scoffed at by the average unbeliever) is that A)there are degrees of sin that are worse than others and a just and merciful God accounts for this at His final judgment and B)along with God's forgiveness comes His grace and His spirit, allowing someone who turns to Him regularly to become more and more of a habitual NON-offender. Each confession of sin and opportunity for forgiveness brings the gift of strength to resist temptation. The sacrifice is good once for all, but yes, I am one of those heretic folk who believe that you can, in fact, lose your salvation if you only gave it lip service to begin with.
And, in retrospect, I suppose you're right about the fact that Christ's death is celebrated. A matter of semantics ultimately, though. Easter is the highest holy day for Christians, after all, not Good Friday.
Just my take on it.
Thanks for being so respectful in your response, btw.
But this is not what the bible says. So - basically you made up your own version to suit yourself. Which is what everyone does. Every one wants to say they know what god wants.
Hence the fighting (and the scoffing).
Just as a matter of interest - is homosexual sex better or worse than killing someone on your list? Can you give us a "top twenty sins" that are worse than taking the Lord's name in vain? On a sliding scale maybe?
From what I've seen, you seem very nice.
I do not ever mean to be rude in any response that I give (unless someone is directly "attacking my person"). And while we might not agree on one point or another, we are both entitled to our opinions and questionings of theologies or philosophies. And, that debate is something that, if so inclined, can be done with a mutual respect between those in the discussion. Enjoy your day:)
"If god is only showing mercy now, because of the sacrifice made by Jesus, then what is the purpose of asking forgiveness? The sacrifice has been made and all sins are covered. There is no need to ask forgiveness for something you have already been forgiven for. "
Ok. Someday I need to do a hub on this. Christians seem to be confused as to what this sacrifice was for and atheist often are too. It wasn't to give a blank slate for all sin. It was for one sin only which none of us can pay for, which is original sin.
So we are all supposedly forgiven for original sin due to Jesus taking that on for us since his father would accept nothing less. No Christian sect should be preaching that we are still soiled with original sin.
When he dies for original sin it opens the door for god to forgive ongoing personal sins so wez all can get ta heaven! Before that we had original sin hanging over us and there was no way out for anyone.
Just clarifying the myth for everyone. lol.... Carry on.
There is no original sin; every human is born innocent; sin is not heriditary.
The concept of "original sin" was invented by Paul and continued by the Church for their on vested interests; they both are therefore Anti-Christ in this sense. It has got nothing to do with Jesus or Mary.
And, you continue to defame other religions when your very own religion was invented by Muhammad for his on vested interests.
I have tried to explain this one before...They just don't get it. So I normally ask questions similar to the one above.
It is still believed all men are born in sin (original sin).
It Jesus only died for removal of the original sin...well then I would say that some folks are -waaaayyyy- behind on the sacrifices required for the forgiveness of the other sins.
But Jesus is the new deal. Accept the fact that he was murdered on your behalf, become a willing accessory to that murder, and you no long have to make animal sacrifices to have your sins forgiven. Lent perhaps, but that's about it. All you have to do is confess your sins to god and you are forgiven. But only if you are really sorry and promise not to do it again.
) I never understood the confessing the sin part...Isn't it christian doctrine that god already knows what is in your heart? He should already know that you sinned and if you are truly sorry or not.
I think it is supposed to be enough that you confess them to yourself and want to be forgiven. Not much different from the real world, since that is the process any person has to undergo to make changes within themselves.
The other part of it is trying to make things right. But if you have put in the effort to do that, the last phase is forgiving yourself. It's easier to do if you think a god already has..
You know...it seems, some folks just want to make it hard to actually live life as a good decent person. If I screw up...I say OOPS and correct it and move on. It doesn't take a belief in anything to do that. Why would someone make being a good person hard work? I really don't understand some people sometimes.
It is my opinion, people use god and satan as a crutch for why they can't act like a decent human being. "I am a sinner, satan made me do it, god has to help me overcome my temptations and evil ways"
I say, quit acting like boob and get over yourself. Grow a pair and admit your mistakes and then fix them. Stop blaming others for your imperfections. Blaming your faults on satan or anyone else is straight up lying. Claiming god helped you do something, is nothing more than bragging on yourself, while pretending you aren't.
There is much you dont understand it seems.
Gods thoughts are not your thoughts,
and Gods ways are not your ways.
Then there's a whole bunch of us who don't understand, because Slarty's analysis of the events in the Bible seems accurate to me.
Id agree with that statement. I used to be one of those people.
We are all free to choose ,isnt that a good thing
It is indeed!
Would you like to explain the Crucifixion the way you see it?
A Roman custom that was cruel and lingering.
True enough, it was an extremely cruel custom. And Jesus's willingness to die?
By example to show all that followed that he was prepared to do the Fathers will and NOT his own will.
( Jesus did cry out -during the crucifixion,If there be any other way Father,take this cup from me) then added.. But not my will ,Your will be done.
I don't know that I made myself clear, but that is actually what I was trying to say. The judgment was ultimately due for original sin - which is why we continue to approach God and ask for forgiveness, which He offers and then gives grace to grow out of our sinful natures. That's what I was trying to say when I made the comment about it being possible to lose salvation if all you do is pay it lip service but don't approach God continuously to allow Him to effect the change in us. Make more sense?
So, is that a premise for Muslims and Jews or just a premise for Christians? Depending on your answer, you may be starting from a false premise.
Unfortunately, the flaw in that logic is that this god already understands we will fail in carrying out his commands, hence he cannot mete out justice of any kind knowing we will fail.
Restitution or not, you will be sent to jail for robbing a jewelry store. Sorry doesn't cut it in front of a judge. You broke the law, but the big difference here relates to your flaw above in that the law understands that you will not fail in abiding by the law.
Only a psychotic megalomaniac would do such a thing.
Nonsense, nowhere in the bible does it say that Jesus accepted such a mission from god. And, it was not a choice he made to die, it was a choice made for him by the Romans when he was arrested and crucified. He did nothing to make that happen, literally and figuratively.
Had your god thought of mercy in the first place, he would have instead saved Jesus from crucifixion in front of everyone there, thus showing his mercy, meting out proper justice and making everyone believe in him.
You should try reading that over a few times to see how utterly ridiculous that sounds.
Then let's simply start from this premise, Beelzedad. You do not believe in a God at all. Therefore, anything following is utterly ridiculous. I accept that as your right.
Thank you for pointing out how utterly ridiculous everything I said actually was. I'd never have recognized it otherwise.
You are to be commended for your superior knowledge.
As for Jesus' choice in the matter:
And this is a starting premise, by the way for Christians. And before you get all high and mighty about the whole one God thing - why would the first commandment be to "have no other gods before me," if there was only one God. Not all believers in Christ are of the opinion that only one God exists - only that there is one Supreme above all and being the One who created everything else.
No, whether I believe in a god or not does not preclude the fact you present contradictions in your thinking process.
Superior knowledge has nothing to do with pointing out the absurd and irrational.
You probably haven't noticed because you know little if nothing at all about other religions, that they too will boast a similar statement in that their god is the one and only god.
Yes, I know, it's really quite amazing the nonsense people accept when they become indoctrinated into a religion, and not just Christianity.
"Now, knowing that you cannot, in this case, make restitution for breaking His commands, and wanting to be merciful, this God above all gods, sends His Son to earth to make the only restitution that can be made - death."
See. I'm with you on most of your post. But this is the kicker. When I have done wrong, I am punished. A judge does not allow another to take my punishment. Is it moral for me to accept that someone else take my punishment for me? I don't think it is. I wouldn't allow it. I would refuse it.
I can even see being sentenced to die and having your soul rubbed out to be a fitting punishment for some crimes like willful murder, child rape and murder, etc. But even for those crimes eternal torture seems utterly excessive.
Then there are the sins like not believing he exists, which carries that same sentence. That seems absolutely over the top. It's like a judge sentencing you to be beaten every day for the rest of your life for spiting on the sidewalk.
Slarty, I personally feel that the punishment for unbelief is only for those who have intentionally rejected the message, not those who've never heard of Him.
And, of course, I'm among those strange ones who happens to believe that only God knows the heart of man at every moment, and that there may be options after death that fundamentals do not acknowledge or believe in. Again, what makes me unpopular with fundamentalist and gets scoffs from unbelievers. Oddly enough, I never mentioned that I "fight" with fundies, just that I'm unpopular among them (in response to Mark's post).
See. The problem is that wording. The Church teaches that those who have never heard the word will only be punished for their deeds. But as soon as you have heard the word, you have no excuse.
The message of Jesus is sound in some respects like love your neighbor etc. So most moral people would not reject that idea. But they might reject that it comes from a god. Yet that alone is said to bring eternal hell.
I can certainly understand the struggle with that. I happen to think that just because you don't boycott the funerals of Marines or burn Qurans or stand in front of Planned Parenthood clinics and hand out religious tracts or sail overseas to "witness" to heathens rather than feeding the hungry at your own back door, doesn't mean you don't "serve" God, or believe in Him, or strive to be a better person because of Him. But, you know, I'm weird like that. And, I'm one of those heretics who believes that both faith and works are necessary. UGH.
Woah woah woah. You think that someones death is an acceptable restitution for another mans wrong doing?
I think that any man has a right to lay down his life for whomever he chooses. That is what Jesus did.
No no no no no thats not what I have a problem with. You think that a man dying for another mans wrong doing is acceptable to your god as restitution.
What type of country would we live in if a high court judge would accept the death of another man as payment for a murderers actions?
Im really glad you are not in politics or in a position of power.
Well, I didn't write the book, I was explaining the belief. So, since I'm not God, what difference does it make what I think about how He chooses to make restitution for mankind?
And, I'm glad I'm not in politics or in a position of power either, so that makes two of us.
Thanks for the respectful tone you took there. It was much appreciated.
But, he didn't do that, he was arrested and crucified and had no choice in the matter of laying down his life.
Actually, Jesus laid down his life, via his actions, which he knew what the consequences were of doing to begin with.
He was executed, not for the sins of humankind, but to keep religion from being destroyed, because Jesus' teachings were not religious and nothing to do with religion.
He wasn't preaching religion, he was teaching his understanding of life and living in the world in which we(humankind) does.
If he deliberatley laid down his life then why did he ask his friends for help (and they said they didnt know him) and also he called to his father (himself) "why hast thou forsaken me".
That doesnt sound like the actions of a man laying down his life. It sounds like a man being killed against his will.
Like my statement said- Jesus knew what the laws were in play, when he made his blasphemy call- claiming to be god. That is the ultimate action Jesus understood would end his life.
As for what was claimed for him saying on the cross? Is hearsay at best. It's most likely, because of the puncture of the spear, he was dead in minutes and not saying anything.
As for his "friends", they barely knew who they themselves were, much less, understand who Jesus was to begin with.
Dude, the entire book from start to finish is hearsay. It was written at least 100 years after he died.
Some gospels were written decades after Jesus' execution, yes, that's not disputed. But, are a part of the collective knowledge available to humankind.
The fact is that the gospels have been written and accounted for. However, those gospels themselves can only be viewed in their original document form, in one place.
The original documents exist as written works, which are to be learned from. Not the learning, you are thinking along, which is to be taken literally as a religion. No, anything derived from the bible, is for the benefit of humankind.
There is an overall message. Actually, there are plenty of messages within the scripture, but specific knowledge is required, to put them into proper context, so to convey the knowledge necessary for the advancement of humankind.
Jesus' teachings about Life and his bottom-line message matters.
It has nothing to do with a god. Anyone who says it does, fails in understanding his message or lack knowledge of his time.
I can tell you now, when I researched religion, I found that a couple of the gospels were copied from one other. Hand writing analysis confirms(it's not the only thing it confirmed) that three gospels were written by the same person. So, the validity of those are completely out the window. The corrupt teachings of Paul, made the "church" what it is today. A joke.
Yes. The idea that a soldier has given his life for the people he loves, to keep them safe, is a valid concept and your benefiting from that is not immoral. You are innocent and a potential victim of war.
But that is not the same as allowing some one to die in your place, to take your "rightful" punishment for a crime you have committed. A person hight do it for you because they love you, so they are doing something heroic. But are you a moral person if you accept it?
I can see the import of that question...If it was done without my knowledge and then offered to me as a gift of mercy, I don't necessarily see anything wrong with accepting the offer...which is the case here.
God required the sacrifice to be without blemish and since no man was without blemish.. the only
one who could make the ultimate sacrifice was Jesus Christ!
So it probably doesnt matter whether we would or wouldnt...allow it.
But it does matter whether or not you accept it.
Gods sacrifice was the ultimate sacrifice.
Gods wisdom is greater than mans.
Therefore I accept His Lordship and I am not ashamed to say so.
I am not picking, I just want to know your take on something.
Did God made the sacrifice? (to himself)
Or did Jesus offer to be the sacrifice?
I ask because in Luke 22:42 is says: "Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done."
This implies that Jesus ask to not be the sacrifice, but would do as he was instructed (told/forced) to do.
If God offered the sacrifice ( as implied by Lk 22:42), Why would he offer a sacrifice to himself? God is considered to be all powerful, instead of a sacrifice, why didn't he just remove all sin.
Your thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks
Ah great minds think alike
My understanding is that Jesus although born of man ,no sin was found in him ,was on a mission to instruct the people about God,himself and the Holy Spirit.
Jesus was in the unique position of identifying with mankind,and also as the son of God.
I dont know the full answer to part of your question,but I'm excited to find out.
My thoughts are that Jesus wasnt thrilled about the actual suffering side( in fact his sweat had blood in it) ,but showed he trusted his father to obey His will, and Jesus still had compassion at the cross for his family,instructing a brother to comfort his mother.
So I would definately say Jesus was willing to obey His father and since his preaching and authority came from God,Jesus would have understood the sacrifice and why.
( Also dont forget the Jews had been asking God for a Messiah for years ,a new King, and since they rejected Christ,he also became their scapegoat.)
Note of interest:
Did you know that Messiah and Christ both mean Anointed One. And that Kings were "anointed" by the "church"( religious leader) into that position. The Bishop is normally the one who placed the crown on the Kings head.
Ah. Willing to follow what if it were anyone else you would consider a tyrant, just so you can live forever. Are you not even a little ashamed?
Living and being with Jesus ,no I am not ashamed Im excited.
Good for you. It does raise questions about your morality though.
No disrespect intended ,but so long as I please the one on the throne, thats really all that matters to me
If you are implying I have bad morals, because of blah, blah ,blah. I dont -imagine that!
Hard to imagine you know whether you pleased him or not. And I'm sure you don't imagine that just because you are allowing an innocent man to be murdered to pay for your sin that you are immoral. But I'd say that's the definition of immoral.
Well then by definition your god is immoral.
I don't have to speak for everyone. It is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of logic and fact. That you don't understand isn't my fault.
I have heard and read your arguments. It seems that you take sin lightly, and of no consequence. If you could pay for all your sin and all those you have sinned against and all that damage that was incurred because of it, how would you pay and with what? Do you take it seriously?
Specifically punitive/restitution damages and lets talk rehabilitation. You don't seem too concerned of the latter, either. There doesn't seem to be any true remorse in your premise, just a disingenuous loophole.
What "reason or logic" do you offer that allows you to dictate the severity (or assumed lack of severity in your case) of your sin; its consequences on others throughout their lifetimes and possibly their eternal life; and allows you determine/dictate your own punishment /punitive /restitution/rehabilitation?
PhoenixV. I take sin lightly? It depends on what you mean by sin If you mean murder and theft then no. I don't take those lightly. If you mean no believing your god exists then yes. It's a joke. Only an egomaniac tyrant would decree that to be a sin.
What remorse would you like me to have? I don't recognize sin in the first place as I do not believe in your god. But I have done wrong and regretted it in my life and made restitution when I was able, and never did those things again. But that isn't sin. Sin is a decree, as by a tyrant or a king. It is not morality. Morality can not be decreed, and decreed morality is not moral.
I'm talking from the perspective of what is moral from the human standpoint. What your god does is not moral or just by any standard.
I am sure that God is amused at your attempts to "plea bargain" 1.your own case 2.without Advocate.
Out of curiosity, what is your offer? Feigned moral indignation at the Court ain't cutting any mustard seeds.
How convenient for you I'm sure. Human morals from thousands of years ago? Human morals a thousand years in the future? Your morals or mine? Human morals come and go like the wind and change directions even more frequently.
I agree. It could hardly be describes as a god when it killed all but a handful of it's "creation" because it went bananas when attention wasn't going it's way.
I find it to be deeply psychotic myself, and as you say only a megalomaniac would claim so much then deliver absolutely nothing real. Nothing at all.
No show, (although omnipresent
No prayers answered by any god ever, not one of the thousands of "answered" prayers has provided proof, unless you consider some loon claiming he found their car keys while he let a few million innocent children die "proof".
No capacity to stop disasters, (although omnipotent, and in charge of the elements)
PhoenixV I'm sure your god isn't anything, as thank goodness it is a bad fantasy. Why would I plea bargain and to whom? If there were a god and was as barbaric and backward as you claim, then there would be no point. I'd accept my fate at it's hands and spit in it's face.
However, that you can't tell what is just and what isn't does not surprise me. That you follow a tyrant just so you can live for eternity groveling to it is your business. You are even luckier than I that it doesn't exist.
Morality exists without your fantasy. Cause and effect demand it. No god required. So a human is capable of judging it objectively. However some of us, like the fundamentalists such as yourself, will see the Emperors new clothes because they don't want to be considered stupid or offend the Emperor. Yet he is naked and those that don't stand up and say it are gullible or dishonest.
Have you ever heard someone justify not paying for their meal after they ate or drank at a pizza place or bar and ran out on the tab? Instead of being honest and admitting they didn't have their wallet on them or were broke and hungry? They come up with justifications ie, they ate there before and it was a bad meal or the drinks were over priced or water downed, trying to alleviate the conscience they cannot escape? Kind of like your argument. You cant pay, but cant run away.
..And some of us (like you) are so full of pride and excuses for their belief system they will seek to justify their actions (good and bad)according to their values.
You are correct to assume there is no need for God when Self is running the show.
Good luck with that.
Not one of us asked to be born. I owe nothing. If it is a debt I can't pay then it was one I didn't ask to be burdened with in the first place.
I am just happy your twisted god and your twisted morality are a fantasy. Your selfish desire to grovel so may live forever is absurd and pathetic.
I pay for my own actions, unlike christians
Oh I am at peace and happy. No thanks to your myth. Like I said, I do not recognize the idea that I was born in sin as anything more than a sick fantasy. If it were true I would still owe nothing because I did not ask to be born in sin or out. If for that I go to hell then so be it. But I would not grovel for eternal life.
In fact, when I die, please your god and your devil to leave me in peace. It's the least they can do.
No dear, as happy as you seem to be that I may not be happy with my life, I am probably happier than you because I know your god is a sick myth.
I love the totality of existence and wonder at the universe. That's more than enough for me. I also stay out of trouble so I don't bring it upon myself.
There is no more peace than being rid of you religion. You should try it. It is liberating
Yes. It was done without your foreknowledge or consent. But then, for the final phase, your entrance to heaven, you have to consent. You have to thank god for doing it for you. For murdering his son on your behalf.
If you reject the sacrifice you go to hell.
To me this is a very symbolic moral issue that few if any Christians think about, ever.
It is moral blackmail.
Gospel of Slarty:
And the Lord said: "I'm making you an offer you can't refuse because it is already done on your behalf. You are now saved from my wrath. But to consummate the deal you must consent to the murder that has already been committed and become a willing accessory to it. Or the deal is off and you will feel my anger and wrath for eternity. Which is it to be?"
Like I said before: Even if I thought it was real I wouldn't take the deal.
Tell me this then:
Do you think there should have been any consquence?
How would that work today? crime etc
I think the UK and US legal, trial and prison system is WAY superior to accepting the death of some guy to pay for anothers wrong doing.
I think a murderer should be in prison and not set free after killing some guy who lived down the road.
I agree, immediate justice for immediate crime. Gotta have boundaries.
But God's court is much higher than any court man has ,so stands to reason his justice would be far reaching and for ALL time.
It does stand to reason, yes, but since he accepts the death of someone to repay anything atall it is highly questionnable dont you think?
Thing is ,you must take into account the law of the land during this time (God certainly did). Sacrifice for the sin of all mankind would need to be a someone who had never sinned before or had no blemish. ( Jesus Christ)
The Jewish custom for the atonement of sin(before Jesus,that is) was to present a living sacrifice of livestock, the sacrifice was to be a an animal with no blemish (since their income relied heavily on animal trade (farming) the slaughter of these animals took place periodically, and was quite the sacred event. Then and only then ,did they have their sins forgiven by the High Priest.
That is why one of the names of Christ is "Lamb Of God"
Jesus was the sacrifice for ALL mankind. Before him, they sacrificed animals for individual or family sin. It was the law of the land at that time.
How on earth does the fact that it was a long time ago make it OK? I know it was acceptable back then but then so was having slaves.
Do you honestly think that just because something was a long time ago it was acceptable?
How can a blood sacrifice pay for anything? It doesnt make any sense. It doesnt make sense now and it would have made just as much sense 2000 years ago.
Its like saying that keping slaves was ok 50 years ago.
No, it wasnt. It was never ok to keep slaves and the fact that it was 50 years ago does not mean it was acceptable back then.
Well it sounded like you didnt understand history.
Youd need to take some of your complaints up with the Jewish nation then.
No, I understand perfectly well thank you. People thought slavery was ok but that does not mean that it was ok does it?
If you found a time machine, went back 50 years would y keep slaves because everyone around you thought it was ok? Would you think it was ok because you were in the 1950's?
Of course you wouldnt. (at least I hope you wouldnt).
Slavery was always wrong wether people thought so at the time or not.
And by the same token, the death of a man or animal, does not make recompense for someone elses crime. That makes no sense atall now and it never did no matter what primitive people thought.
No I dont agree with slavery,and Im thankful I was not born in the time period or even at other times too.
On a side not, even in 2011 some employers are just as oppressive,but thats another topic.
But it was their culture never the less.
We all have history and not all of it is pretty.
I do see your point though,it doesnt seem fair. Personally I know God is a just and loving God ,so Im willing to trust His way.
Wow, Thanks for being honest. Most people I discuss things like this with, go to any length to try and argue me wrong. More often then not, instead of providing a reasonable explanation they just accuse me of bullying and threaten me with hell then stop replying. Its nice to see some honesty. Thanks
No ,I mean thanks, lol ,but seriously I did get where you were coming from.
Many questions I have asked myself over time and some remain unanswered,but just because something doesnt make sense ,does not necessarily mean it was wrong -or part of some bigger plan.
Having said that I try to remain open to learning new things.
I will never understand how you can think that there is a bigger plan that makes sacrificing someone or something to pay for anothers crime acceptable as recompense.
Surely if it was acceptable to god then, it should still be acceptable to him now. If he knows everything and is never changing.......
"this God above all gods, sends His Son to earth to make the only restitution that can be made - death."
Why would a god need the death of a son to repair what he is supposed to have made in the first place.
after 30yrs of studying "in one side and out the other" you post this as well
This is why i dislike catholicism
And, after this, I really am done playing. This only matters IF you believe in a Christian God. If not, the quality of the argument is invalid and useless and nonsensical to anyone. And, since I am not trying to convince or sway anyone to any set of beliefs, I'm not really arguing anything, just speculating about my own belief structure.
Have fun, everyone.
I believe that it is a 100% moral religion; however, I am a Christian so my opinion may be a bit biased
Stoning rape victims to death is not moral. I really hope you dont think that it is. I really hope you are one of those christians who hasnt read the bible.
Hate to be the bearer of bad news ,but dont they still follow old laws in many Arabic places? like eye for an eye
Yep and thats one of the reasons I hate religions. Because I think the laws were written by men thousands of years ago and since they got religious status, they are not open to change or update.
This is why africans murder gays, americans murder abortion doctors and fundamentalist muslims kill everyone.
Religion is the biggest cause of conflict the whole world over and there is no need for it.
Do you know that Jesus abhored Religious men too?
In fact he called their hearts like 'white washed sepchres' Jesus likened them to the inside of a tomb!! that was pretty nasty and also revealing.
He very strongly voiced his disgust at their evil.
Corruption is evil I agree.
I beleive in a Christ that loves and rejoices in freedom for all mankind.
A Christ that died so that my life here on earth would not be wasted and I ,you, everyone would be reconciled to God and Eternity!
Youre allowed to be you will soon meet others who are just as biased the other way round lol
Welcome to HPages, btw
I think the person who asks the question about why christ's death is celebrated is not meant to offend. There's nothing wrong with questioning religion. I absolutely understand the point and agree that it's a bit odd. I'm a former catholic by the way.
That's is really hard to accept and forgive someone who's murderer, so according to human standard, all killer should go to hell and suffer the eternal damnation. But, for our heavenly father "GOD" has different standard and willing to forgive our sin as long as we repent our sin and accept Jesus Christ as our savior.
No matter how good or bad, God loves every mankind on earth. All human are treated equal and we're loving by God.
Bottom line is that we all need to obey God and his rule. God is perfect and we can't compare our-self to God's Standard. Hope that Helps.
Slarty O'Brian wrote:
Is it moral to profit from the murder of an innocent man? If you accept that the person is murdered to give you everlasting life aren’t you just as guilty of the crime? If a man said to his son, let them murder you and I forgive all of them their debts to me. What would you think of that man? That he is crazy? An egomaniac?
I agree with you.
Really it would be a very immoral act by any standards; but this Jesus never believed in; this philosophy is wrongly invented by Paul and cruelly continued by the Church; in this sense Paul and the Church are both anti-Christ. They have nothing to do with Jesus or Mary; they were peaceful and loving persons; couldn't think of this immoral philosophy or act.
The Romainian state does make it difficult.
Do some more research.
Is Christianity really a moral religion?
Christianity starts with an immoral act; father killing a son or daughter; but that is from Paul, scribes and the Church; they started Christianity with poor morals.
Jesus was a standard of morals like Krishna, Buddha,Zorosater, Moses and Muhammad, in this sense they were brothers; all the prophets messengers.
No Gods judgement is not a mockery.
You think for one moment that all these religions astound him ? surprise him.
Or the sins of man ,or the lies that people tell about him ,or the people he communicates with, or even that He is not interested in the affairs of man.
God will not be mocked and He will someday judge us all!
Only God knows for sure.
If youre right ,then yep Id have about as much chance of being Muslim (or not)
But thats not my reality is it?
And I know how much you guys like to keep it real
But whats the difference ,I mean what are you saying?
If I was born in the USA and therefore American ,I would be indoctrinated ( really is not the right word) as an American.
I was born in New Zealand ,therefore I am indoctrinated as a New Zealander-Kiwi.
I can accept influenced ,or imprinted , to a degree.
I suspect brainwashed is another word you favour?
Im just getting what your point is?
The point I am making, is that peoples beliefs are subject to their environment.
So it is not a matter of having "the one true god," it is subjective.
How can a person of a particular religion claim to have truth when under different influences their beliefs would be entirely different? I have put the same question to my muslim friends.
We are the product of our environment, so any belief will be subjective and therefore anything but set in concrete as most religionists are.
I am no longer a christian as you know, because I broadened my horizons partly through traveling and absorbing other cultures.
I have seen many who believe in a god, but usually just one. The one they were indoctrinated to believe.
If the word atheist were to be applied, it would apply to all the worlds religionists who do not accept each others gods.
It is all madness.
Well I bow down to the God I know.
I also accept there are many thousands of other believers out there from all the four corners so to speak ,who worship the God they know.
Yes there is unity ,and yes there is conflict.
(Conflict is a mankind problem ,not a Religious one)
My goodness I can even go to church with a nieghbour and we can still have a different perspective on say , scripture.
Since the 12 tribes of Judah spread far and wide,it stands to reason that so did doctrines and creeds.
One Love -One God
It is logical.
A miracle in itself.
Millions of people ,all different ,yet they share 2 things in common.
All humans. Doesnt matter if they walk,talk and think differently.
Born naked ,with no speech ,no knowledge ,innocent.
Hi kiwi, You are absolutely correct.
I'm outta here!
Too much ducking and diving, no grasp on reality at all from any of you.
Never let truth get in the way of fear.
What choosing? If you choose nothing, then you have no free will.
But, your consciousness and free thought, defeats your own statement. Nice try though.
If you choose nothing, you've still made a choice...Don't you listen to "Rush"? As it is practiced, the adherents of mainstream christianity fall far below what is actually expected of them. None are Christ-like enough to pull off the messiah bit. Pauline thought actually led them astray from the teachings of Jesus, and went beyond the bounds of the early church. The more time passed, the further off the true path they have strayed. You all stress out when you perceive that there are certain rules to follow, yet, living in any society, there are rules to follow.
Of course, choosing nothing is not to be confused with not choosing anything.
Two very different things.
Actually Druid, there are no rules from any external authority required. One can guide themselves, based on building their own character, through the choices the make. And, yes, doing nothing is a choice, but how does it reflect on one's character?
And, for your statement about Pauline thoughts, I would agree. The church strayed from the original teachings Jesus tried to instill before he was executed. Those in power saw him as a threat, which was the main reason for his execution, not the sins of humankind.
Oh it was better than a try ,it was correct according to the word of God.
To answer the original question, by Christian standards, sure Christianity is moral. But that's just circular logic, of course. By a rational sense of right and wrong... probably not.
In other news, it's so good to know that the Word of God is consistent and reliable. How could a viable moral system arise from an inconsistent doctrine?
Phew! That is a long thread...
Morality by definition is "...a sense of behavioral conduct that differentiates intentions, decisions, and actions between those that are good (or right) and bad (or wrong)...In its "descriptive" sense, morality refers to personal or cultural values, codes of conduct or social mores that distinguish between right and wrong in the human society. Describing morality in this way is not making a claim about what is objectively right or wrong, but only referring to what is considered right or wrong by an individual or some group of people (such as a religion). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality
"Is Christianity really a moral religion?"
If morality is determined by following a set of rules that decide between right and wrong, then, yes; Christianity is a moral religion.
The rules were set forth in advance of them being broken. The rules determine the actions and consequences that must be taken to ensure the integrity of the moral standard.
"If you accept that the person is murdered to give you everlasting life aren’t you just as guilty of the crime?" Those who committed the crime should be rightly punished.
Receiving the benefits of His death does not make you accountable for His death.
If your father was murdered and you accepted a monetary payment from his life insurance policy, does that make you as guilty as the murderer?
Accepting Jesus death as payment for your sins is a perfectly moral thing to do when you understand why it happened the way it did.
Jesus did not die on the Cross; so it is meaningless to believe that sins have anything to do with the death of another person.
If one has headache; giving a pill to another person won't cure one.
by Ahmad Usman6 years ago
Every Christian believes that their sins are forgiven by the blessed name and blood of Jesus on the Cross. The concept that Jesus (PBUH) died for the SINS of Mankind (Original Sin/Blood Atonement) runs contrary to not...
by janesix5 years ago
Christians,doesnt that bother you?even a little?how many Ted Bundys do you think are "saved"?Do you care who your neighbors are going to be for all Eternity?
by Nicole Canfield5 years ago
So, if the people on earth were Pagan before Christ ever got here, where did they go? Heaven or Hell? What if they never heard the name of Jesus or knew about the Jewish faith, is that fair to send them all to Hell?
by denden mangubat3 years ago
Threatening folks is not an act of mercy, it is an act of hatred.
by Matthew Kirk4 years ago
This is a genuine question;I would like to know the mechanics of how a man being killed by a group of Romans washes away sins?I don't want to be preached to, I would like a 'rational' answer / explanation if one can be...
by Chris Remmie2 years ago
After a careful reading of Romans 9, what provokes one to bring God's justice into question when Paul anticipates these questions of objection? What's the controversy Paul is bringing to light here?"Is there...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.