since i can't edit i'll say that after thinking about it i can sort of make sense of the animal sacrifices. they think that by basically giving up a portion of something which is gonna hurt them financially they are showing that they have taken a hit basically to pay for their sins. almost like you have to pay fines for some crimes instead of jail time. is that right? i can sorta understand why ancient people would think that way if so.
Originally posted by red g jacks
i understand that. wasn't trying to imply that it was. but let's say you don't forgive someone for a crime and decide to press charges instead. that's still just since they committed the crime and deserve to pay for it.
Nothing stops you from forgiving and denouncing a crime at the same time. Forgiveness is not pretending things didn't happen either, it's taking away a part of that responsability from the person you offend by aknowledging they have finished their business with you. In a way, forgiveness allows you to give a fair punishment instead of just punishing to do harm. There a precious and near impossible balance between those things.
Originally posted by red g jacks
maybe not, but it is still warranted at the end of the day is it not? like say god decides not to shed mercy on you for a sin and punishes you instead... is that unjust? if not then the punishment is basically justice. mercy is basically god being a nice guy. if the mercy is justice too then biblical justice and morality seems even more arbitrary than human justice and morality. basically boils down to "whatever god decides to do in any particular occasion."
Christianity works in a concept of penitence, once the person has discovered he wronged others, he tries to make life better for everyone. Those efforts are the things that stand between him and punishment.
We agree that doing good deeds won't erase the bad ones, but does that mean they can't outweight the bad? If someone is fair, turns his life around and everyone benefits from it, because he learned from his errors, would then the errors deserve the same punishment as a person who just did wrong and lived without trying to make up for it? In this concept mercy can also be justice.
Originally posted by red g jacks
yea.. complex is one way of putting it. it seems a bit nonsensical to me to think that offering a sacrifice to god could cleanse you of a sin. that sacrifice doesn't erase the bad deed any more than you being punished would erase the bad deed.
At the end of the day you can't really fix a bad deed after it's done, any system that tries to make up for it is going to be limited.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
After all, I don't remember reading, in history, about atheists burning Christians at the stake.
that's in the past... and they are not Christians... in OT and NT, it is probihited for Christians to kill...
and from what i'm seeing HERE, Christianity is attacked more than atheism... and most of the reasons of the attack are wrong interpretations from the Bible...
Originally posted by Greatest I am
It seems that you do not fully understand what an immoral creed Christians follow.2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.1 Timothy 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
maybe you don't understand the passages you quoted... i see nothing immoral about that... it only shows that the God in the Bible is compassionate and wants all people to be saved...
Originally posted by Greatest I am
Having another innocent person suffer for the wrongs you have done, --- so that you might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is immoral.Jesus said to pick up your cross and follow him but I see that you have taken the line that someone else should pay your dues. Quite manly and moral that. Not.
Do you really think someone else can pay your dues and allow you to shirk your just reward?
you have a very twisted mind to say that, GIA... it's not like we forced Jesus to die for our sins...
God the Father loves the people He created, Jesus His Son also loves the people... God sent His Son (and Jesus obeyed willingly) to die for the sins of the people...
what's the catch? THERE'S NO CATCH! common misinterpretation is that you needed to be a Christian to be saved... well, yeah, sort of, but it's not mandatory... you see, if you believe in Jesus (which means you also believe in God), then you'll be saved (that's future tense)... you need to continue to be a good person until the end...
why is there no catch? because unbelievers can also be saved! example, you do not believe in Christian doctrines but you are a good person, doing good works, you will be saved... just like i was saying before, hell is not created for people but for satan and his minions... the only time a person will be thrown to hell is when he is as evil as satan... and that's justice...
Originally posted by Greatest I am
You do not seem to be aware that atheists just do not like to see otherwise intelligent people lost to real belief in the supernatural.I guess that you have not seen the surveys that show the numbers of Christians who have been hurt by your belief in hell and Satan and the notion that they were born for hell and must somehow extricate themselves from God's condemnation.
i want to reiterate this... NO ONE is born just to be thrown to hell... NO ONE... hell is created for satan and his minions...
"Then he will say to those at his left hand, Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels;"
Matthew 25:41
if you can give a single verse in the Bible that tells a good person is predetermined to go to hell, then i will concede...
Originally posted by Greatest I am
Christians are intentionally cruel to their children by lying to them about supernatural and idiotic superstitions.Atheist have more heart and concern for their fellow man than Christians.
You just do not like the taste of the medicine that cures foolish faith.
Regards
DL
you know what's the similarity, dude? i do believe both Christians and atheists are capable of doing good works and both can be candidates for salvation... both can have compassion with fellow people...
the difference? belief... we believe in God, and we have a set of doctrines written in the Bible as a guide... atheists don't... but i'm not saying one is greater than the other...
your attitude actually tells me that you hate Christians, all the while preaching atheists are more compassionate...
Originally posted by Greatest I am
He also said that any who believed in him could do what he did and more.Note how in 2,000 tears there has not been even one believer.
If there would have been even one, we would all know it.
i do believe that you don't know what you're talking about... okay, let's see, you're talking about this:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the Father."
John 14:12
i know not everyone will believe but this was done by Paul of Tarsus...
"Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church,"
Colossians 1:24
"For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.
But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me was not in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I, but the grace of God which is with me."
I Corinthians 15:9-10
this may sound self-serving but considering the fact that Paul did acknowledged that it was not him but the grace of God in him...
Originally posted by Greatest I am
So who are all these people who say they believe and obviously do not?Is that also you?
If not, show what you can do. Believer.
Regards
DL
here? i cannot show you here in the forum... i can only speak with you here, and correct the misinterpretations you have in the Bible...
Originally posted by red g jacks
since i can't edit i'll say that after thinking about it i can sort of make sense of the animal sacrifices. they think that by basically giving up a portion of something which is gonna hurt them financially they are showing that they have taken a hit basically to pay for their sins. almost like you have to pay fines for some crimes instead of jail time. is that right? i can sorta understand why ancient people would think that way if so.
Yes, I think that was the original intention of the system, the religious law worked like a court of law of sorts, it tried to make sense of morality from a social perspective.
Originally posted by Bentleyif i'm understanding you correctly you're basically agreeing with the basic idea that punishment = justice but you are adding the caveat that there are other, less harsh roads to justice. so maybe you can do a million good deeds instead of punishment or something like that. i can see the merit in that, honestly. but it still requires some sort of effort on behalf of the sinner for his sins. the part about christianity that really seems pointless to me is saying jesus died for my sins. that seems like some sort of vicarious punishment or vicarious good deed that is really unnecessary. if they said he did it just to be an example of an exemplary human being then i could understand that. but the way they frame it, he had to be crucified for our sins to be forgiven. that is just weird to me.
Nothing stops you from forgiving and denouncing a crime at the same time. Forgiveness is not pretending things didn't happen either, it's taking away a part of that responsability from the person you offend by aknowledging they have finished their business with you. In a way, forgiveness allows you to give a fair punishment instead of just punishing to do harm. There a precious and near impossible balance between those thingsChristianity works in a concept of penitence, once the person has discovered he wronged others, he tries to make life better for everyone. Those efforts are the things that stand between him and punishment.
We agree that doing good deeds won't erase the bad ones, but does that mean they can't outweight the bad? If someone is fair, turns his life around and everyone benefits from it, because he learned from his errors, would then the errors deserve the same punishment as a person who just did wrong and lived without trying to make up for it? In this concept mercy can also be justice.
.
Originally posted by red g jacks
the part about christianity that really seems pointless to me is saying jesus died for my sins. that seems like some sort of vicarious punishment or vicarious good deed that is really unnecessary. if they said he did it just to be an example of an exemplary human being then i could understand that. but the way they frame it, he had to be crucified for our sins to be forgiven. that is just weird to me.
I see where you come from and to be honest, it's going to be hard to explain how the redemption work without making it sound at least a bit weird.
In christianity a sin is not just a bad deed that needs to be punished, it's also considered an offense towards God. Jesus's role as a mediator plays at that level which is, as far as I can tell, beyond conventional justice or morality. Those two statements I just wrote can be interpreted in countless ways, you can read the responsability you have to God as a social responsability, you can extend it to nature (being responsible of animals, living beings, materials) or spiritual elements. You can also read Jesus's sacrifice as a deconstruction of religion, you no longer have to "care" about having offended God's dignity, because Jesus has your back, just act on the stuff he left for his disciplines (doing good into others, more or less).
Back in the day the relationship with divinity was a lot about offending gods and so forth and so on, hence this redemption was a very important part of christian teachings. That dimension is entirely lost to us, because we don't seek to buy out supernatural beings.
A sin is a pretty opaque thing in our modern society, we can understand the idea of evil and bad deeds, but we'd have a hard time dealing with the "offending God" side of things as far as morality goes. Which is why I think it makes for a very poor introductory place to convert people or discuss christianity at all.
A sin is a pretty opaque thing in our modern society, we can understand the idea of evil and bad deeds, but we'd have a hard time dealing with the "offending God" side of things as far as morality goes. Which is why I think it makes for a very poor introductory place to convert people or discuss christianity at all.
Originally posted by dyajeep
that's in the past... and they are not Christians... in OT and NT, it is probihited for Christians to kill...and from what i'm seeing HERE, Christianity is attacked more than atheism... and most of the reasons of the attack are wrong interpretations from the Bible...
maybe you don't understand the passages you quoted... i see nothing immoral about that... it only shows that the God in the Bible is compassionate and wants all people to be saved...
you have a very twisted mind to say that, GIA... it's not like we forced Jesus to die for our sins...
God the Father loves the people He created, Jesus His Son also loves the people... God sent His Son (and Jesus obeyed willingly) to die for the sins of the people...
what's the catch? THERE'S NO CATCH! common misinterpretation is that you needed to be a Christian to be saved... well, yeah, sort of, but it's not mandatory... you see, if you believe in Jesus (which means you also believe in God), then you'll be saved (that's future tense)... you need to continue to be a good person until the end...
why is there no catch? because unbelievers can also be saved! example, you do not believe in Christian doctrines but you are a good person, doing good works, you will be saved... just like i was saying before, hell is not created for people but for satan and his minions... the only time a person will be thrown to hell is when he is as evil as satan... and that's justice...
i want to reiterate this... NO ONE is born just to be thrown to hell... NO ONE... hell is created for satan and his minions...
"Then he will say to those at his left hand, Depart from me, you cursed, into [b]the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels
;"
Matthew 25:41if you can give a single verse in the Bible that tells a good person is predetermined to go to hell, then i will concede...
you know what's the similarity, dude? i do believe both Christians and atheists are capable of doing good works and both can be candidates for salvation... both can have compassion with fellow people...
the difference? belief... we believe in God, and we have a set of doctrines written in the Bible as a guide... atheists don't... but i'm not saying one is greater than the other...
your attitude actually tells me that you hate Christians, all the while preaching atheists are more compassionate...
i do believe that you don't know what you're talking about... okay, let's see, you're talking about this:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the Father."
John 14:12i know not everyone will believe but this was done by Paul of Tarsus...
"Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church,"
Colossians 1:24"For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.
But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me was not in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I, but the grace of God which is with me."
I Corinthians 15:9-10this may sound self-serving but considering the fact that Paul did acknowledged that it was not him but the grace of God in him...
here? i cannot show you here in the forum... i can only speak with you here, and correct the misinterpretations you have in the Bible... [/B]
So you cannot do what Jesus says you can do. Ok.
You confused what I said above so let me clear it up.
The following 2 quotes are why I call what God did murder. As you can see, a sacrifice was not required.
2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
1 Timothy 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
As you can see all are saved without a sacrifice.
================
This is the morality you should adopt instead of trying to use Jesus as your scapegoat.
Having another innocent person suffer for the wrongs you have done, --- so that you might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is immoral.
Jesus said to pick up your cross and follow him but I see that you have taken the line that someone else should pay your dues. Quite manly and moral that. Not.
Do you really think someone else can pay your dues and allow you to shirk your just reward?
Deuteronomy 24:16 (ESV) “Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.
Ezekiel 18:20 (ESV) The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.
The declaration which says that God visits the sins of the fathers upon the children is contrary to every principle of moral justice. [Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason]
As above so below.
If you had God's power, would you not be able to find a way that does not go against the wisdom of Jesus and the bible?
Perhaps like being man enough to step up to your own demands for a worthy sacrifice?
That is what a good God would do.
Regards
DL
Originally posted by Greatest I am
So you cannot do what Jesus says you can do. Ok.
got no problem with that... i believe He is a God manifested in the flesh...
Originally posted by Greatest I am
You confused what I said above so let me clear it up.The following 2 quotes are why I call what God did murder. As you can see, a sacrifice was not required.
2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.1 Timothy 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
As you can see all are saved without a sacrifice.
i guess you don't understand how "the system" works... you see, the payment for sin is death (Romans 6:23) so there is a need for someone's death to pay for the sins... this is the ultimate sacrifice not just for the Son, but for the Father as well... can you imagine how the Father felt when He sees His Sin is being battered and crucified to death? it's not murder, but a great sacrifice for the sins to be eliminated...
Originally posted by Greatest I am
This is the morality you should adopt instead of trying to use Jesus as your scapegoat.Having another innocent person suffer for the wrongs you have done, --- so that you might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is immoral.
Jesus said to pick up your cross and follow him but I see that you have taken the line that someone else should pay your dues. Quite manly and moral that. Not.
so you assume that after believing and acquiring faith in God and Jesus, then everything's okay? nope... the teaching of "Perseverance of the saints" or popularly known as "Once Saved, Always Saved" is NOT a Christian nor Biblical doctrine...
a true Christian should continue to abide Christ's teachings until the end (Matthew 10:22)...
Originally posted by Greatest I am
Do you really think someone else can pay your dues and allow you to shirk your just reward?Deuteronomy 24:16 (ESV) “Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.
Ezekiel 18:20 (ESV) The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.
i do believe in what the Scriptures say... sin is not inherited and so is the righteousness... but that logic does not apply when you believe in Jesus and you will be saved... there's no connection in there... Noah, Daniel and Job cannot save their own children because of their righteousness, they are saving their own (Ezekiel 14:20)... but if you believe in Christ and hold fast to His teachings, you will be saved (I Corinthians 15:1-2)...
You keep showing us your poor morals.
Let's see if we can help you think in a moral way.
As above, so below.
Imagine you have two children. One of your children does something wrong – say it curses, or throws a temper tantrum, or something like that. In fact, say it does this on a regular basis, and you continually forgive your child, but it never seems to change.
Now suppose one day you’ve had enough, you need to do something different. You still wish to forgive your child, but nothing has worked. Do you go to your second child, your good child, and punish it to atone for the sins of the first?
In fact, if you ever saw a parent on the street punish one of their children for the actions of their other child, how would you react? Would you support their decision, or would you be offended? Because God punished Jesus -- his good child -- for the sins of his other children.
Interestingly, some historical royal families would beat their slaves when their own children did wrong – you should not, after all, ever beat a prince. The question is: what kind of lesson does that teach the child who actually did the harm? Does it teach them to be a better person, to stop doing harm, or does it teach them both that they won't themselves be punished, and also that punishing other people is normal? I know that's not a lesson I would want to teach my children, and I suspect it's not a lesson most Christians would want to teach theirs. So why does God?
For me, that’s at least one significant reason I find Jesus’ atonement of our sin to be morally repugnant – of course, that’s assuming Jesus ever existed; that original sin actually exists; that God actually exists; etc.
Regards
DL
Like I said in the other thread, GIA continually twists things around to make God look bad. God never "murders" anyone. He punishes them. Yes, sometimes that means they die for their sins but it's not murder by any means. GIA is either trying to willfully deceive people (and will be punished for it by God) or he needs to learn the definition of what murder is.
Originally posted by Star428
Like I said in the other thread, GIA twists things around to make God look bad. God never "murders" anyone. He punishes them. Yes, sometimes that means they die for their sins but it's not murder by any means.
The god of the OT killed people all the time. Was it murder? That all depends on rather you believe that the god of the OT is real or not.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That's not true. People have been scared to death by things that don't exist.
In such case, the agent killing you is not an unexisting entity, because it doesn't exist.
Otherwise I can get lots of people with heart problems and make entire pantheons of aliens, comicbook characters and other fictional forces, set them up, and make them all murderers.