Can you handle the Truth?

I fail to see the sadism in it.

Jesus said it is easier for the poor to get into Heaven than the rich, because money is the root of all evil. Money changes people, or can change people, anyway. The rich back then usually got their money by being corrupt, accepting bribes, or taking advantage of other people.

In theory, you can be rich and be a very good Christian, but it's really hard to not be corrupted by all that money. It's like that phrase "absolute power corrupts absolutely." People win the Lottery and start out giving their money to charities and trying to help people, but it gets to be too much and they lose their relationship with God, just feeling despair at how things turned out.

As for arguing divinity, whether you believe it or not, this whole idea about committing certain sins sort of implies a divine concept. If Jesus was just a human being, who cares what he did or didn't do? By your participation, you're at least accepting the premise that Jesus was divine.

Love of money is the root of all evil. The money itself isn't the problem.

There are many people who were just human, yet they inspired and changed the world. Should we not listen to anyone simply because they weren't "God made flesh"?

Originally posted by Robtard
There are many people who were just human, yet they inspired and changed the world. Should we not listen to anyone simply because they weren't "God made flesh"?

Shouldn't you put more stock in the statements of someone who is?

There is no proof that Jesus was more/less divine than Ghandi, Hitler or Stuttering John.

But yea, it it were someone proved, sure, I'd trust the creator of everything as to what I should or shouldn't do over my mechanic. Problem is, Jesus didn't write anything down, did he? It's all other peoples words of what Jesus said.

Originally posted by willofthewisp
By your participation, you're at least accepting the premise that Jesus was divine.

That's ignorant.

I don't think it has anything to do with money being evil or it makes you evil. I was taught it had more to do with the methods to get all that money.

But, what ever rocks your well satisfied boat.

Not the first to bring this up, but the manner in which the Bible depicts God, it paints a picture of God being a proper idiot with ridiculous limitations.

If you're God (omnipotent/omniscient) and you want to tell/show all us lowly mortals that you rewrote your own rulebook, washed away our sins and there is only one way to reach heaven etc., surely God could have in an instant let 'himself' be known in the eyes, hearts and minds of every person on the planet and said, "hey, worship Jesus-God or you can't get in".

Why go through the trouble of being born (human) through a virgin, then living in near obscurity for 30 odd years only to then start giving your message to a rather small group of people?

God has spoken directly to people in the past, Moses, Noah, Abraham, why not tell everyone directly instead of relying on message mules, who are flawed by creation?

Edit: I find it odd that the most righteous never ask these questions.

Originally posted by Robtard
Not the first to bring this up, but the manner in which the Bible depicts God, it paints a picture of God being a proper idiot with ridiculous limitations.

If you're God (omnipotent/omniscient) and you want to tell/show all us lowly mortals that you rewrote your own rulebook, washed away our sins and there is only one way to reach heaven etc., surely God could have in an instant let 'himself' be known in the eyes, hearts and minds of every person on the planet and said, "hey, worship Jesus-God or you can't get in".

Why go through the trouble of being born (human) through a virgin, then living in near obscurity for 30 odd years only to then start giving your message to a rather small group of people?

God has spoken directly to people in the past, Moses, Noah, Abraham, why not tell everyone directly instead of relying on message mules, who are flawed by creation?

Edit: I find it odd that the most righteous never ask these questions.

You're working from the assumption that God can't be quirky.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You're working from the assumption that God can't be quirky.

So that does it, you're willingly to overlook anything and not ask the question because 'God is eccentric'?

Originally posted by Robtard
So that does it, you're willingly to overlook anything and not ask the question because 'God is eccentric'?

That can't be true. Read my signature. If that were the case, I'd find him interesting.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Because it was man who sinned and was in need of redemption. So the Son of God became flesh so that He could take upon Himself the wages of humanity's sin. The wages of sin is death (spiritual then physical). Once that sin has been expiated God no longer will hold humanity responsible for it. But, there is one condition: in order for a person's sin to be remitted by God that person must exercise faith in Jesus Christ (the sacrificial payment for his/her sin). Apart from Christ each person must suffer eternal payment for his/her own sin.

JIA it was ONE man, "ONE", who sinned. men by their very nature are individul entities, not born with any natural spiritual contact with others before or after them. a person is an INDIVIDUAL. if my father commited a murder, no1 in their right mind would blame ME for it, even if his blood ran through me and he was responsible for "creating" me so to speak. also, the interpreation of 1/3rd of gd taking human flesh and trying to save humanity while the rest of th 2/3rd is directly responsible for creating th criteria for humanity's punishment, makes it sound like god has a multiple/dissociative personality disorder. hmmm, you know what, jokes aside, dissociative personalit disorder WOULD give one REASONABLE and consistant explanation of the 3 in one concept of trinity.

Originally posted by Robtard
So that does it, you're willingly to overlook anything and not ask the question because 'God is eccentric'?

It is very much a possible (and reasonable) answer to the question.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
It is very much a possible (and reasonable) answer to the question.

Curious, does the bible ever show God as haiving a sense of humour?

Originally posted by Robtard
Curious, does the bible ever show God as haiving a sense of humour?

Not a requirement for eccentricity. Irrelevant.

There are a few instances of God being said to laugh. There's also a bit of dark ironic humor in the Bible that wouldn't be remotely funny by modern standards.

Originally posted by Robtard
Not the first to bring this up, but the manner in which the Bible depicts God, it paints a picture of God being a proper idiot with ridiculous limitations.

If you're God (omnipotent/omniscient) and you want to tell/show all us lowly mortals that you rewrote your own rulebook, washed away our sins and there is only one way to reach heaven etc., surely God could have in an instant let 'himself' be known in the eyes, hearts and minds of every person on the planet and said, "hey, worship Jesus-God or you can't get in".

Why go through the trouble of being born (human) through a virgin, then living in near obscurity for 30 odd years only to then start giving your message to a rather small group of people?

God has spoken directly to people in the past, Moses, Noah, Abraham, why not tell everyone directly instead of relying on message mules, who are flawed by creation?

Edit: I find it odd that the most righteous never ask these questions.

What's wrong with messengers?

Originally posted by Robtard
Curious, does the bible ever show God as haiving a sense of humour?

Well, there's that Michelangelo painting of him asking Adam to pull his finger. I think that qualifies. Granted, it's kind of Blue Collar Comedy tour humor, but I think even that counts for some people.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Not a requirement for eccentricity. Irrelevant.

There are a few instances of God being said to laugh. There's also a bit of dark ironic humor in the Bible that wouldn't be remotely funny by modern standards.

It was a completely unrelated question, the only thing I had to say in reponse to your post was "lame", but decided not to.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
What's wrong with messengers?

Nothing really, but when you have the power to do something yourself that is infinitely more efficient and would be effortless, why rely on slumps that could mess up.

Originally posted by Robtard
It was a completely unrelated question, the only thing I had to say in reponse to your post was "lame", but decided not to.

The only response to your silly retort is to call is such. And I have done so.

Night all.

Originally posted by Devil King
Well, there's that Michelangelo painting of him asking Adam to pull his finger. I think that qualifies. Granted, it's kind of Blue Collar Comedy tour humor, but I think even that counts for some people.

Would that be similar to the bible's account of Jesus' looks and then the paintings of a blue eyed hippie?