193 replies to this topic

[arunma]

Before I begin my responses, I have two points:Serious scholars don't question the existence of Jesus. Yes, there are a few that do, but then again, there are also a few astrophysicists who believe that the earth is the center of the universe (look up Dr. Gerardus Bouw if you don't believe me). Whatever you believe about his divinity, the historical existence of Jesus is widely regarded as a fact.

There is no academic conspiracy against Christianity. In college I once read a textbook on the New Testament written by a non-Christian, and there was no overtly anti-Christian content that I could find. America has always had laws against separation of church and state. Based on what happened in Europe, it's better this way.

Alter my religious beliefs? I'm just saying they have some rather convincing arguments. That's not to say that everyone should go out and adopt an Eastern religion because of it. And why would everything that disagrees with your religious beliefs have to be made up or grossly exaggerated?

Well, is there any primary source attesting to this strange reincarnation theory? I'm just saying that crackpots say funny things all the time. Heck, sometimes these funny things get put into independently made documentaries, and falsely portrayed as facts. In the film "What the Bleep Do We Know?" which purported weird new age beliefs as genuine science, it was stated that a scientific study proved that human speech had mystical power. It cited the study as showing that different vials of ice, some of which formed beautifully shaped patterns, while others formed aesthetically displeasing patterns. The difference was that the "researcher" spoke kind words like "I love you" to the former vials, and unkind words like "I hate you" to the latter vials. It turns out, though, that the study was not performed according to scientific rigor (for example, it was not a double-blind study). In fact, the study wasn't even portrayed as scientific, the "researchers" clearly said that it was for entertainment purposes only. And as a physicist I can tell you that most of the science in that documentary was patently false. So as you can see, people make stuff up all the time.

Seriously though. What kind of person believes in some guy who comes down and heals people? And then dies for their sins?

I don't respect people who believe that some guy saved them from eternal torture.

You don't respect such people? You're free to disrespect whoever you'd like (just not on this forum), but you can't expect for everyone else to at least wonder why. You seem to find Christianity preposterous, but you don't give any justification for this opinion. Can you do so?

Besides. Someone can't be God and a Human at the same time. It's just not possible.

Wait...you don't believe in God, but you don't believe that someone can be God and human at the same time? How does that work.

That's still not evidence to prove Jesus did miracles. Could be some crazy messed up guy on drugs.

I'm still not convinced Jesus was a miracle worker. For all I know he's still the same old judgemental God shaking his finger at us from a million miles away.

Hypothetically speaking, what would qualify as evidence?

[SOAP]

They are.

They say if I don't get Christed up I'm going to be damned.

If you don't believe in God and by extension hell, why would that bother you? That's like someone telling me I'm going to be a cockroach in the next life if I deny Shiva. So what? I'll get stepped on and reincarnate as something else. *shrug*

Enough with the goddamn preaching. We've heard it all before.

God doesn't love anyone if he forces us to believe in him to avoid damnation. That is not a loving god.

Fyxe, what talking are you talking about? The only people taht have been preaching since you've last posted were non-Christians preaching how Christians are wrong. But if you want preaching I'll preach. First of all God does not force anyone to believe in him. He gave us free will to chose to believe in him or not. He's not going to strike you down with a thunderbolt if you deny his name. God never sent anyone to hell besides Satan and his rebel angels. People willingly chose to go to hell when they deny God's salvation. You're pissed at God for not saving you from Hell when you decided you didn't want his salvation? He's not loving for not twisting your arm and forcing you to believe in him yet he's twisting your arm for giving you a choice in the matter? Where is the logic in that?

Edited by SOAP, 08 May 2007 - 03:33 AM.

[wisp]

SOAP, I believe Fyxe was referring to the preaching that TempleMaster has been doing in this and other threads. Every second post of his is a testamonial about his faith and a statement that everyone else should probably believe the same thing.

[SOAP]

Ah okay.

Edit: But I am getting sick of the negative posts against Christianity. I find it disgusting that people would flagrantly disrespect people because of their faith. I'd feel the same for people of any religion not just us Christians. Atheists complain about others shoving their beliefs down their throats yet do the very same things themselves.

Edited by SOAP, 08 May 2007 - 03:29 AM.

[wisp]

I don't think anyone means to do that, it just comes off that way in a debate.

[SOAP]

And we don't mean to preach either. But a big part of Christianity is to tell others about Christ, even if it means risking your reputation or even your own life. I said in another debate that's it's not about getting people to like us. We're not here to win popularity points. We're just sharing something we've felt changed our lives and how can change the lives of others too. That's just what humans do. We SHARE. I just find it really aggravating when nonbelievers complain about God not be a loving god for sending people who don't know him to hell yet they don't want to hear about Him when those that do know Him want to tell them about Him.

Edited by SOAP, 08 May 2007 - 03:48 AM.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

People willingly chose to go to hell when they deny God's salvation. You're pissed at God for not saving you from Hell when you decided you didn't want his salvation? He's not loving for not twisting your arm and forcing you to believe in him yet he's twisting your arm for giving you a choice in the matter? Where is the logic in that?

I don't know, but it sounds as if you're missing the point.

An atheist does not believe in Hell, therefore any arguments of this kind are arguments that state the idea of Hell is nonsensical in relation to a compassionate God. Because, Hell is a place where people are punished infinitely for a finite crime. It's overkill. People can only sin or reject God a finite number of times, but they're punished infinitely for it.

However, this of course assumes that Hell is a place no one can escape from. Now if it was like the Chinese concept of Hell that would be a tad more logically coherent with the idea of a compassionate God that eventually forgives (i.e. you only suffer in Hell for a finite amount of time depending on the crime you committed). However, most Christians don't believe in that concept of Hell, both literally and loosely, and certainly, I don't remember seeing any evidence in the Bible saying it's one way or the other.

The new atheist debate tactic is to assume God exists and then criticise the concept of God by showing logical flaws in it.

Now that I think about it, I've been guilty of it too and it's logically flawed. By doing what we've done, we only prove that the Judeo-Christian concept of God is not true, and not that there are no gods. It's a step in the right direction and I supplement it by also stating there is no evidence to prove any god exists, so there's no point in believing in one. However, many atheists fail to do it and thus, they come off looking as illogical as the supposedly illogical religious people they debate against.

[SOAP]

I don't know, but it sounds as if you're missing the point.

An atheist does not believe in Hell, therefore any arguments of this kind are arguments that state the idea of Hell is nonsensical in relation to a compassionate God. Because, Hell is a place where people are punished infinitely for a finite crime. It's overkill. People can only sin or reject God a finite number of times, but they're punished infinitely for it.

However, this of course assumes that Hell is a place no one can escape from. Now if it was like the Chinese concept of Hell that would be a tad more logically coherent with the idea of a compassionate God that eventually forgives (i.e. you only suffer in Hell for a finite amount of time depending on the crime you committed). However, most Christians don't believe in that concept of Hell, both literally and loosely, and certainly, I don't remember seeing any evidence in the Bible saying it's one way or the other.

The new atheist debate tactic is to assume God exists and then criticise the concept of God by showing logical flaws in it.

Now that I think about it, I've been guilty of it too and it's logically flawed. By doing what we've done, we only prove that the Judeo-Christian concept of God is not true, and not that there are no gods. It's a step in the right direction and I supplement it by also stating there is no evidence to prove any god exists, so there's no point in believing in one. However, many atheists fail to do it and thus, they come off looking as illogical as the supposedly illogical religious people they debate against.

I don't know if hell is a infinite punishment or not. The other Abrahamic faiths that share the same God treat hell as more a temporary condition and more of a cleansing processes. In the Muslim faith, you suffer for a thousand years until your sins are washed away until your soul is cleansed and you can ascend unto Heaven with everyone else. I believe the Mormons also hold a similar belief. But even if Hell is an eternal punishment that does not contradict God's compassion. Various verses such as Ezekiel 33:11 and II Peter 3:9 clearly state that God does not seek pleasure by seeing people fall into hell. He wants to save us yet we reject his help. How do you expect God to help you if you don't want his help? At a certian point God says "Okay fine. Have it your way." God's not going to force you to stay in Heaven with him if you obviously don't want anything to do with him.

My problem with the way you assuming God exists is that you want to make up your own version of God and not the one of the Judea-Christian faith. You assumew God is nothing more than an over-glorified super human. Of course you'd find the logical flaws in such a god, I would too. All you prove is the nonexistence of a god that I don't even believe exists either in the first place. You argue the existence of the Judea-Christian God yet you don't understand the very nature of God. You think you understand him but you don't. You have in your head your own version of God taht's a silly caricature so I'm not at all surprised you wouldn't believe in God the way you understand him to be. I wouldn't believe in your version of god either.

Edited by SOAP, 08 May 2007 - 04:22 AM.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

My problem with the way you assuming God exists is that you want to make up your own version of God and not the one of the Judea-Christian faith. You assumew God is nothing more than an over-glorified super human. Of course you'd find the logical flaws in such a god, I would too. All you prove is the nonexistence of a god that I don't even believe exists either in the first place. You argue the existence of the Judea-Christian God yet you don't understand the very nature of God. You think you understand him but you don't. You have in your head your own version of God taht's a silly caricature so I'm not at all surprised you wouldn't believe in God the way you understand him to be. I wouldn't believe in your version of god either.

I just don't understand you, SOAP.

I assume that God has all the qualities of the Biblical God and the ideal that many Christians have of him. Yet you still say I assume he's nothing more than an over-glorified super human? If that is the case, then it's not my fault.

[SOAP]

I just don't understand you, SOAP.

I assume that God has all the qualities of the Biblical God and the ideal that many Christians have of him. Yet you still say I assume he's nothing more than an over-glorified super human? If that is the case, then it's not my fault.

Not in the debates we've had. You assume if God exists, he cannot be all-knowing, does not deserve credit for anything, and didn't even create us. You also assume God is not compassionate and actively sends people to hell. All of these contradict what the Bible says. Where you get your version of God I may never know.

I don't understand you. You told me once that you didn't want to tell me how God's nature contradicts what you know to be true yet you were unwilling to elaborate because I would somehow have an explanation for such contradictions. Seems more like you don't want an explanation because you WANT God to be illogical and void of compassion and unworthy of any devotion whatsoever even if he existed. you want to give me a million reason why God exists but you don't want to hear even one reason why he does. You already made up your mind that God must a certain way all because you say so. Because you somehow know everything about a God that you're not even willing to know in the first place.

The difference between me and you is that at least I wanted to understand your side despite my own stubbornness on the matter but you couldn't even at least humor me.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

Not in the debates we've had. You assume if God exists, he cannot be all-knowing, does not deserve credit for anything, and didn't even create us.

Cannot be all-knowing, yes, because the evidence in the Bible and the evidence around us shows that either he does not know or he does not care. If he is compassionate, he does not know. If he is not compassionate, then he doesn't care. However, I never said he didn't deserve credit for anything, just the credit should not be given to things he did not himself have a direct hand in creating. And I don't believe he created us. If he did exist, he invented evolution, which created us. He could have created us, but he chose not to. I never said he couldn't create us.

You also assume God is not compassionate and actively sends people to hell.

Yes. But how is that relevant to anything?

All of these contradict what the Bible says. Where you get your version of God I may never know.

Reading the Bible. Listening to what Christians say. What? You think only your interpretation is right?

I told you one of the contradictions about God being compassionate. If he is compassionate, why is he overdoing it with the evil? Being omniscient, he must know about it. He must know he's overdoing it. If he is omniscient, he can't be compassionate, because the evil and suffering he's created is far too much. If he is compassionate, then he can't be omniscient, otherwise he'd know about this evil and he'd tone it down.

Here's another one.

God cannot lie. Would you say this is true or not true? If it's true, then the Bible proves this statement false. God does lie. He lied to Eve about dying when you eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. There is nothing in his words to suggest it is a spiritual death or not a literal one. He said she would die in the same day she ate from the Tree. Pretty straightforward if you ask me. Yet she does not die.

Skip to Exodus. After Moses destroys the tablets on which are the Commandments God laid out to him, God then says he will give Moses the exact same Commandments again. So he does so. Yet they're not the same. So either he's being senile or he's lied to Moses. The second set cannot be a reinterpretation of the old set. How can "Thou shalt not cook a goat in its mother's milk" be interpreted as any of the previous set of Commandments?

Here's another one.

Many people believe that Satan is the author of all evil. Yet in the Bible, God clearly states in Isaiah 45:7, "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things."

Here's yet another one.

Hosesa 1:4, God condemns Jehu for the slaughters at Jezreel. Yet in 2 Kings 10:30 and in 2 Chronicles 22:2, God commends Jehu for killing the people at Jezreel, indeed, it was his will that there should be a slaughter there.

So if I believe in a gross illogical God, it is only the reference source that is to blame. However, I'm smart enough to realise that the Bible is not infallible. However, what justification do I have to not use the Bible as a template to show me how God thinks and how he behaves? What else can I use?

Oh and as for not knowing, here's a Biblical passage that shows he cannot know everything...

And the Lord said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous, I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and, if not, I will know. Genesis 18:20-21

All of this compounded with the fact that there is no real empirical evidence for God's existence, causes me not to believe in a God or a Heaven or a Hell.

Edited by Wolf_ODonnell, 08 May 2007 - 06:33 AM.

[SOAP]

Cannot be all-knowing, yes, because the evidence in the Bible and the evidence around us shows that either he does not know or he does not care. If he is compassionate, he does not know. If he is not compassionate, then he doesn't care. However, I never said he didn't deserve credit for anything, just the credit should not be given to things he did not himself have a direct hand in creating. And I don't believe he created us. If he did exist, he invented evolution, which created us. He could have created us, but he chose not to. I never said he couldn't create us.

Yes. But how is that relevant to anything?
Reading the Bible. Listening to what Christians say. What? You think only your interpretation is right?

I told you one of the contradictions about God being compassionate. If he is compassionate, why is he overdoing it with the evil? Being omniscient, he must know about it. He must know he's overdoing it. If he is omniscient, he can't be compassionate, because the evil and suffering he's created is far too much. If he is compassionate, then he can't be omniscient, otherwise he'd know about this evil and he'd tone it down.

Here's another one.

God cannot lie. Would you say this is true or not true? If it's true, then the Bible proves this statement false. God does lie. He lied to Eve about dying when you eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. There is nothing in his words to suggest it is a spiritual death or not a literal one. He said she would die in the same day she ate from the Tree. Pretty straightforward if you ask me. Yet she does not die.

Skip to Exodus. After Moses destroys the tablets on which are the Commandments God laid out to him, God then says he will give Moses the exact same Commandments again. So he does so. Yet they're not the same. So either he's being senile or he's lied to Moses. The second set cannot be a reinterpretation of the old set. How can "Thou shalt not cook a goat in its mother's milk" be interpreted as any of the previous set of Commandments?

Here's another one.

Many people believe that Satan is the author of all evil. Yet in the Bible, God clearly states in Isaiah 45:7, "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things."

Here's yet another one.

Hosesa 1:4, God condemns Jehu for the slaughters at Jezreel. Yet in 2 Kings 10:30 and in 2 Chronicles 22:2, God commends Jehu for killing the people at Jezreel, indeed, it was his will that there should be a slaughter there.

So if I believe in a gross illogical God, it is only the reference source that is to blame. However, I'm smart enough to realise that the Bible is not infallible. However, what justification do I have to not use the Bible as a template to show me how God thinks and how he behaves? What else can I use?

Oh and as for not knowing, here's a Biblical passage that shows he cannot know everything...

And the Lord said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous, I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and, if not, I will know. Genesis 18:20-21

All of this compounded with the fact that there is no real empirical evidence for God's existence, causes me not to believe in a God or a Heaven or a Hell.

Thank you for your honesty. These are actually fair and honest question. I could be a dick and pull a bunch of half-brain answers out of my ass but all I can say is that I don't know. I don't know if God lied to Eve or even if the Garden of Eden story ever happened for that matter. I don't know how God acn be all knowing and all-compassionate at the same time. I don't know why there is suffering in this world. Hopefully someone more learned in Christianity like Arunma can answer these questions but I will admit that I can't. All I can say is none of those questions are anything that I haven't wondered about myself. I still don't have the answers to most of them but the only question that matters to me is if I want God's love and the answer is yes.

[Arturo]

THIS bit would be the whole 'myth' bit.

It's a historical fact that soem people (the apostles) believed he had resurrected. I don't say he resurrected, I say he was said to have resurrected.- Those are very different things.

[wisp]

I don't know if hell is a infinite punishment or not. The other Abrahamic faiths that share the same God treat hell as more a temporary condition and more of a cleansing processes. In the Muslim faith, you suffer for a thousand years until your sins are washed away until your soul is cleansed and you can ascend unto Heaven with everyone else.

Still seems a bit overdone. A thousand years of torture for one lifetime that you didn't choose to live in the first place?

[SOAP]

What do mean you didn't chose? You should be grateful you have at least one life. Some humans die before they even leave their mother's womb. Whatever you do with your one life is up to you. Are you saying we shouldn't be held responsible for anything we do?

[TempleMaster]

I apologize for sounding preachy towards everyone on these forums when I speak, but everyone seems to only be talking about the bad aspects of not being a Christian. The fact is that there is nothing bad about being a Christian and human nature tends to want to shove all that aside. Everyone is ok with talking about Hell whether it exsists or not and that God doesn't exsist as well as foolish ideas such as Reincarnation, but someone gets offended when we talk about how much God loves us? Isn't that as a bit strange that we can talk about everything negative, but on a postive note, there is nothing but strife that is said towards someone? I'm not trying to put anyone down, but one post on how God loves us and everyone gets so up tight about that. Yet in the negative aspect, we can talk all day long and it gets juicy, but on positive things, they get frustrating. I just don't see the advantages or reasoning behind that kind of logic.

[Keen]

Some people live their entire lives without any knowledge of any monotheistic religion. How is it fair at all to send such people to Hell? Some people, like myself are simply structured in such a way that we cannot accept Christianity. Do we deserve to be condemned?

Also, while it is impossible to prove that there can be no God at all, it does remain possible to define the concept of God in such a way that God must exist. Suppose God is the sum of all existence. Such a God must exist, although it is humanly impossible to know that God's extent. But such a God, while being omnipotent and omniscient, would be responsible for all good and evil one might perceive. Such a concept of God really tells us nothing about the nature of the universe, but mentioning this concept reveals a bit about the nature of our communication about God.

[wisp]

What do mean you didn't chose? You should be grateful you have at least one life. Some humans die before they even leave their mother's womb. Whatever you do with your one life is up to you. Are you saying we shouldn't be held responsible for anything we do?

Supposing God chooses to create us... he creates us the way we are, sin and all. Some of us, like Toran said, are not wired to accept Christianity, some are not wired to accept certain other religions they may have been born into, and some are not wired to accept the existence of a god or gods at all. It's not my fault if I cannot force myself to believe in something that simply does not agree with what is in my heart. So, basically, I'm saying that we shouldn't be punished unfairly for what someone considers "sin" which is really just a part of our natural state of being. Yes, a thousand years or an eternity, either way, is too much punishment to balance one lifetime unless someone's misdeeds were so grossly far-reaching that they caused hundreds or thousands of other people to suffer greatly.

Really, the concept of sin is often ridiculous and not even consistent within the Christian religion itself. How, honestly, are we expected to strive for sinless lives when Church A is telling us that it's a sin to have sex before marriage, or to eat pork, or to support certain wars while Church B is telling us that all war is sinful and goes against the commandments of God, and Church C is telling us that nothing really counts as a sin unless it harms oneself or someone else, therefore having sex and eating pork are perfectly fine?

Edit: I was thinking about this more on my way to get lunch. You know, the God that in the Old Testament said "an eye for an eye" really had something there. While I think the idea of forgiveness of sin is certainly great, there's no reason the unforgiven should be punished outlandishly for their actions. An eye for an eye does not equal one normal human life of sin without forgiveness being punished by an eternity in hell.

Edited by wisp, 08 May 2007 - 02:55 PM.

[Khallos]

That's why I kind of like Purgatory, it at least punishes you reasonably and according to your sins. Hardly the nicest place, but it offers forgiveness and a way to salvation. I mean in honestly unless you manage to live your whole life without sin, it stands to me it isn't too nasty a punishment for all those, even those who ask for forgiveness have to climb the mountain. After all to enter Heaven after you have absolved yourself of all the sins you commited in life seems a rather fair deal, an eye for an eye, everything is balanced out, justice is upheld and the person can enter Heaven a completly good person.

[TempleMaster]

There is your misconception right there that God in the old testament. That was the laws of the jews back in the days before Jesus came to die for our sins. During that time we, the Gentiles, were not welcomed into the promises of God like we are today. We were lost without hope, but Jesus came to break that barrier and after his death as the ultimate sacrifice, we are all his children now. While Isreal is God's chosen people, we are his adoptive children and loved no less than the sons and daughters of Isreal.

I see what you are getting at with certain churches and I'm not saying that all churches are wrong, but not all of them go by the bible. The passage Whisp where you said that there is no sex before marrigage? That is a moral thing anyway and I honestly think is wrong. Do you realize that is a sin yes, but in the bible when the Sadducees brought forth a woman who had commetted adultry, she was thrown on the ground about to be stoned based on the old laws. Jesus bent down to write something on the ground though no one knows what and after they mocked him and demanded the answer, he got up and said, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone..." The people had to drop the rocks and be on their way because every one of us sins.

I'm not finished yet, while this woman committed adultry, Jesus went to her and declared that she was forgiven for her wrongs. While he was disappointed in this, he However, challenged her to try and give up the sin instead of continuing comitting the sin. There is great love in that story and shows the love of God. I'm not trying to hurt anyone and shun anyone elses beliefs, but consider the love of God in that story. No sin is unbarable to God and we are never to far gone for his mercy. We are all sinners because of what Adam and Eve did in the Garden of Eden at the beginning of time. That was the sin that caused us to be in the world and by simply being born into the world, we are in sin. However, God loves us enough to say that all we have to do is confess and we shall be forgiven.

He also created us and knows every step that we take. He said that he had already written your book before you were born so he is not surprised by anything that we do. While we sin, God knows that we are not perfect and that was why he sent his son to die for us. That means that he loves us and it says that his mercy is sufficent always. While this does not give us the reason to sin, it is a way to challenge us and live more Christ like.

Back to the Churches we were talking about though. Chruches today don't always teach by the Bible. The Bible teaches us how to live a good life and some Churches just take bits and pieces out before leaving the rest alone. There are to many churches that talk about hell and that we are doomed to it if we don't repent, but what we should do is find a church that doesn't tell us to repent, but challenges us to not do the things that are sinful. Find a good church that teaches us how to live and not that we are doomed to a life of Hell. An excellent person I would recommend would Be Pastor Joel Osteen of Houston Texas. He is a good teacher and you can feel the love of God in the words that he speaks. If you'd give him just thirty minutes of listening, you could see the love of God for sure.

Edit: We don't have to climb a mountain to get right with God. When we ask for forgiveness, he instantly comes to us without asking a question and just says that "My son or daughter has come home again." You need to read the prodicles son for this understanding.

Edited by TempleMaster, 08 May 2007 - 03:38 PM.

[Khallos]

But there are those who are simply ignorant of the Christian faith or those who do not recognise God yet live by many if not all of His laws, it seems rather unfair for them to be sent straight to Hell. Far better for them to climb a mountain that forces them to test their faith and be absolved of their sins, it also will be [img]http://forums.legendsalliance.com/public/ALOT.png[/img] harder for such people to truly say they love God and beg for His forgiveness. After experiencing Purgatory you would probably find a far greater understanding and love for God. Of course it's only really the Catholic church who believe in it, so it's pretty hard to slam it down on the many denominations.

[TempleMaster]

If you all would, please read this story straight from the Bible talking about the prodicals son. If you wish to look it up, it is Luke Chapter 15 verses 11-24. Please read I ask before you state cause this will touch your heart. The story goes as follows:

Luke 15:11 Jesus also told them another story: Once a man had two sons. (verse 12)The younger son said to his father, "Give me my share of the property." So the father divided his property between his two sons.(verse 13) Not long after that, the younger son packed up everything he owned and left for a foreign country, were he wasted all his money in wild living. (verse 14) He had spent everything. When a bad famine spread through that whole land. Soon he had nothing to eat. (verse 15) He went to work for a man in that country, and the mand sent him out to take care of his pigs. (verse 16) He would have been glad to eat what the pigs were eating, but no one gave him a thing. (Verse 17) Finally, he came to his senses and said, "My father's workers have plenty to eat, and here I am starving to death! (verse 18) I will go to my father and say to him, Father I have sinned against God in heaven and against you. (verse 19) I am no longer good enough to be called your son. Treat me like one of your workers."

(Verse 20) The younger son got up and started back to his fathers. But when he was still a long way off, his father saw him and felt sorry for him. He ran to his son and hugged and kissed him. (Verse 21) The son said, "Father, I have sinned against God in heaven and against you. I am no longer good enough to be called your son. (Verse 22) But the father said to the servants, "Hurry and bring the best clothes and put them on him. Give him a ring for his finger and sandals for his feet. (Verse 23)Get the best Calf and prepare it, so we can eat and celebrate. (Verse 24) This son of mine was dead, but has now come back to life. He was lost and has now been found." And they began to celebrate.

Can you see the love? God is the father in this story and he took his son back with out asking a question. This is the only account of God running in the Bible. What is he running to? He's not running to a person who has done a great work in miracles. He isn't going to someone who is praising his name. He is running to a man down and defeated realizing that they need his help. God loves his children and by grace and mercy takes us back as his children. He doesn't question what we did in the past and in facts throws our sins away to start fresh and new. He doesn't say "They sinned. Let them climb a mountain to get back in line with me." He runs to the lost and hugs them saying they have come home and celebrates with love.

[SOAP]

Supposing God chooses to create us... he creates us the way we are, sin and all. Some of us, like Toran said, are not wired to accept Christianity, some are not wired to accept certain other religions they may have been born into, and some are not wired to accept the existence of a god or gods at all. It's not my fault if I cannot force myself to believe in something that simply does not agree with what is in my heart. So, basically, I'm saying that we shouldn't be punished unfairly for what someone considers "sin" which is really just a part of our natural state of being. Yes, a thousand years or an eternity, either way, is too much punishment to balance one lifetime unless someone's misdeeds were so grossly far-reaching that they caused hundreds or thousands of other people to suffer greatly.

Really, the concept of sin is often ridiculous and not even consistent within the Christian religion itself. How, honestly, are we expected to strive for sinless lives when Church A is telling us that it's a sin to have sex before marriage, or to eat pork, or to support certain wars while Church B is telling us that all war is sinful and goes against the commandments of God, and Church C is telling us that nothing really counts as a sin unless it harms oneself or someone else, therefore having sex and eating pork are perfectly fine?

Edit: I was thinking about this more on my way to get lunch. You know, the God that in the Old Testament said "an eye for an eye" really had something there. While I think the idea of forgiveness of sin is certainly great, there's no reason the unforgiven should be punished outlandishly for their actions. An eye for an eye does not equal one normal human life of sin without forgiveness being punished by an eternity in hell.

What!? WHAT!? Where are you getting this information? Are these Jewish beliefs or some other religion? Because as far as I know that is not a Christian belief. God did not create us sinful. Maybe he knew mankind would fall into sin but that was not part of his intention. Sure he could've decided not to create us and make something else that was perfectly sinless but he already has angels for that. I dunno but maybe he prefers us imperfect because it's much more meaningful if we rise above our weaknesses and at least try to strive not to sin than if we were wired to be perfect and kiss God's ass 24/7 because that's all we know how to do. I don't know where you're getting this information that some people don't have a choice about believing in God or not. Everyone has a choice. Unless you live in some remote closed off tribe in Africa or Latin America (and even then I suppose God is revealed to them in some way), you still have a choice. If you don't believe in God it's because you chose not to. It's a choices and choices have consequences. By your logic we shouldn't punish criminals who steal, rape, or kill. After all, they can't help they're actions. Actually more to point, what your saying is more like saying we shouldn't imprison criminals for life for murder if they're really, truly sorry after the fact. After all, it hardly takes a minute to kill someone so it would be ridiculous to imprison someone for life for a crime that only takes a short while to commit.

Also, part of being moral is actively going against your natural instincts for the greater good. Killing, lying, stealing are all perfectly natural and sometimes unavoidable but we should still try not to do those things anyways. Is there an echo in here cos I think I've said that a couple of times already.

Secondly, why are are you so fixated on what different churches say about sin? Different churches say different things but the only thing you need to know is that we ALL sin. It's in the Bible. Anyone who says you need to live a perfectly good life and claims to be Christian is a liar. That is not what Christianity is about, following a bunch of rules to a T and I don't see why you would be so worried about that. The only thing Jesus says about going to heaven is to love God, love each other, and follow him (which entails helping the poor, oppressed, and whatnot). Don't worry about your sins because that's already paid for by Christ. Getting worked up about living a perfect life and what counts as a sin and what doesn't is like saying God's sacrifice isn't good enough for you. But if you don't believe in God or Christ that wouldn't matter to you I guess. But fuck what those churches say. The Bible says otherwise.

[wisp]

I didn't say that God created sin. I think either I must've not explained clearly or you must've misread. I said that the general belief is that God created us the way we are, including our humanity. Our humanity, our human nature, leads us to do things that most christian churches label as "sin." If it simply goes against what is in my heart to believe what the Bible says about sin, then according to christian doctrine, if I do not follow the Biblical laws that state what is sin and what is not, I am sinning. It is impossible for me to believe such things as "homosexuality is wrong," or "sex before marriage is always wrong and is considered adultery," or similar such things.

My stated views on sin have absolutely NOTHING to do with murderers! Matters of sexuality or food preference or what have you, like what I mentioned above, are not harmful to anyone unless done to excess, and ANYTHING is harmful when done to excess. There is a fundamental difference in the types of "sin" we are talking about. Of COURSE someone can help killing or doing harm to another person. The deal here is that people cannot help what they believe if they are being true to themselves unless they choose to have someone brainwash them.

Also, the Bible is quite open to interpretation, guys. And translation, and mistranslation. Personally, I agree with the Muslims on this one. The only way to really trust that what you're reading is as close to the original doctrine that was passed down orally is to get a direct, literal translation of your scripture. That on its own is not enough, however, for you must also look at the historical contexts, both in relation to the stories themselves and the definitions of the actual words. Pick up a few different modern or historical Biblical translations and you'll find that they all differ in wording. In some cases, this makes no difference and is just a matter of syntax, but in other cases, you'll find that the entire meaning of passages changes!

That does not spell out "trustworthy source," in my book. Not only that, but even the translations themselves are often vague on whether they are speaking literally or allegorically. There's just no simple way to get a REAL understanding of what the Bible really said originally.

[TheAvengerLever]

Some people live their entire lives without any knowledge of any monotheistic religion. How is it fair at all to send such people to Hell? Some people, like myself are simply structured in such a way that we cannot accept Christianity. Do we deserve to be condemned?

Yes you do.

God doesn't love anyone if he forces us to believe in him to avoid damnation. That is not a loving god.

Reading the Bible. Listening to what Christians say. What? You think only your interpretation is right?

I told you one of the contradictions about God being compassionate. If he is compassionate, why is he overdoing it with the evil? Being omniscient, he must know about it. He must know he's overdoing it. If he is omniscient, he can't be compassionate, because the evil and suffering he's created is far too much. If he is compassionate, then he can't be omniscient, otherwise he'd know about this evil and he'd tone it down.

Here's another one.

God cannot lie. Would you say this is true or not true? If it's true, then the Bible proves this statement false. God does lie. He lied to Eve about dying when you eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. There is nothing in his words to suggest it is a spiritual death or not a literal one. He said she would die in the same day she ate from the Tree. Pretty straightforward if you ask me. Yet she does not die.

Skip to Exodus. After Moses destroys the tablets on which are the Commandments God laid out to him, God then says he will give Moses the exact same Commandments again. So he does so. Yet they're not the same. So either he's being senile or he's lied to Moses. The second set cannot be a reinterpretation of the old set. How can "Thou shalt not cook a goat in its mother's milk" be interpreted as any of the previous set of Commandments?

Here's another one.

Many people believe that Satan is the author of all evil. Yet in the Bible, God clearly states in Isaiah 45:7, "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things."

Here's yet another one.

Hosesa 1:4, God condemns Jehu for the slaughters at Jezreel. Yet in 2 Kings 10:30 and in 2 Chronicles 22:2, God commends Jehu for killing the people at Jezreel, indeed, it was his will that there should be a slaughter there.

So if I believe in a gross illogical God, it is only the reference source that is to blame. However, I'm smart enough to realise that the Bible is not infallible. However, what justification do I have to not use the Bible as a template to show me how God thinks and how he behaves? What else can I use?

Oh and as for not knowing, here's a Biblical passage that shows he cannot know everything...

And the Lord said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous, I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and, if not, I will know. Genesis 18:20-21

All of this compounded with the fact that there is no real empirical evidence for God's existence, causes me not to believe in a God or a Heaven or a Hell.

It looks like you two don't have a clue what you're talking about.

So God is a tyrant. Kudos to him. That doesn't make him any less God. And he's still gonna punish the crap out of you for not following him. Whatcha gonna do about it, eh? What if Christians are right and there is a God who's shaking his fist at us and smiting people? He's gonna send ya to hell for not following him. So, alrighty then. Condemn yourself.

If you don't believe in God and by extension hell, why would that bother you? That's like someone telling me I'm going to be a cockroach in the next life if I deny Shiva. So what? I'll get stepped on and reincarnate as something else. *shrug*

Apparently you're one of the many people who took me seriously.

[wisp]

If you don't want to be taken seriously, then don't leave room for people to think you're being serious.

[TempleMaster]

You want to learn about the love of God, read this. I wrote this straight from the Bible and it does show the love of God as our Heavenly father. This is a story told by Jesus about the father.

If you all would, please read this story straight from the Bible talking about the prodicals son. If you wish to look it up, it is Luke Chapter 15 verses 11-24. Please read I ask before you state cause this will touch your heart. The story goes as follows:

Luke 15:11 Jesus also told them another story: Once a man had two sons. (verse 12)The younger son said to his father, "Give me my share of the property." So the father divided his property between his two sons.(verse 13) Not long after that, the younger son packed up everything he owned and left for a foreign country, were he wasted all his money in wild living. (verse 14) He had spent everything. When a bad famine spread through that whole land. Soon he had nothing to eat. (verse 15) He went to work for a man in that country, and the mand sent him out to take care of his pigs. (verse 16) He would have been glad to eat what the pigs were eating, but no one gave him a thing. (Verse 17) Finally, he came to his senses and said, "My father's workers have plenty to eat, and here I am starving to death! (verse 18) I will go to my father and say to him, Father I have sinned against God in heaven and against you. (verse 19) I am no longer good enough to be called your son. Treat me like one of your workers."

(Verse 20) The younger son got up and started back to his fathers. But when he was still a long way off, his father saw him and felt sorry for him. He ran to his son and hugged and kissed him. (Verse 21) The son said, "Father, I have sinned against God in heaven and against you. I am no longer good enough to be called your son. (Verse 22) But the father said to the servants, "Hurry and bring the best clothes and put them on him. Give him a ring for his finger and sandals for his feet. (Verse 23)Get the best Calf and prepare it, so we can eat and celebrate. (Verse 24) This son of mine was dead, but has now come back to life. He was lost and has now been found." And they began to celebrate.

Can you see the love? God is the father in this story and he took his son back with out asking a question. This is the only account of God running in the Bible. What is he running to? He's not running to a person who has done a great work in miracles. He isn't going to someone who is praising his name. He is running to a man down and defeated realizing that they need his help. God loves his children and by grace and mercy takes us back as his children. He doesn't question what we did in the past and in facts throws our sins away to start fresh and new. He doesn't say "They sinned. Let them climb a mountain to get back in line with me." He runs to the lost and hugs them saying they have come home and celebrates with love.

[SOAP]

I didn't say that God created sin. I think either I must've not explained clearly or you must've misread. I said that the general belief is that God created us the way we are, including our humanity. Our humanity, our human nature, leads us to do things that most christian churches label as "sin." If it simply goes against what is in my heart to believe what the Bible says about sin, then according to christian doctrine, if I do not follow the Biblical laws that state what is sin and what is not, I am sinning. It is impossible for me to believe such things as "homosexuality is wrong," or "sex before marriage is always wrong and is considered adultery," or similar such things.

My stated views on sin have absolutely NOTHING to do with murderers! Matters of sexuality or food preference or what have you, like what I mentioned above, are not harmful to anyone unless done to excess, and ANYTHING is harmful when done to excess. There is a fundamental difference in the types of "sin" we are talking about. Of COURSE someone can help killing or doing harm to another person. The deal here is that people cannot help what they believe if they are being true to themselves unless they choose to have someone brainwash them.

Also, the Bible is quite open to interpretation, guys. And translation, and mistranslation. Personally, I agree with the Muslims on this one. The only way to really trust that what you're reading is as close to the original doctrine that was passed down orally is to get a direct, literal translation of your scripture. That on its own is not enough, however, for you must also look at the historical contexts, both in relation to the stories themselves and the definitions of the actual words. Pick up a few different modern or historical Biblical translations and you'll find that they all differ in wording. In some cases, this makes no difference and is just a matter of syntax, but in other cases, you'll find that the entire meaning of passages changes!

That does not spell out "trustworthy source," in my book. Not only that, but even the translations themselves are often vague on whether they are speaking literally or allegorically. There's just no simple way to get a REAL understanding of what the Bible really said originally.

You're still not listening. It doesn't matter what's a sin or not. We all sin even if it's as small as lying or as big as killing someone. Most of them, if not all, are natural. Killing people is natural and even just as defensible as eating non-kosher foods or having sex before marriage in some cases, such as killing someone that's about to kill you or someone you love. But we still punish those who kill others if they're not in the law enforcement or the military. But all of that doesn't matter because we all sin:

Rom 3:23: "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God..."

Of course it MAY be possible to live your whole life without sin but why go through the trouble when it's easier just to love God. I'm sorry but I just don't buy that people have no responsibility for not loving God. You chose not to and so pay the consequences of your choice afterwards because every choice has consequences. That's just a fact a life, not just religion. Even the smallest decisions in life can have the hugest consequences. But whatever we decide we're responsible. Just like I'd be responsible for not praying to the Greek gods if it turns out they exist instead of the Christian God. I chose to be Christian and therefore only I'm responsible for ending up in Tarturus spending all eternity do some repetive task that's some ironic symbolization of the life I lived on Earth.

Personally I find it more meaningful for people to rise above their nature and still love God despite their flesh and mind wanting to believe otherwise. My brother struggles with sexual sins and he honestly says he doesn't see himself quiting girls anytime soon. You know what he told me the other day. He said if dies living the life of sin that he has, he wouldn't blame God. He would look God in the eye and say he honestly tried to change but ultimately failed. He said if his best wasn't good enough for God then he'd go to hell still loving God because that's how much he's devoted to him. In that my brother is ten times more righteous then some religious fanatic who follows the Laws of God to the very letter yet do not have any sort of compassion in their heart whatsoever.

I cannot stress enough how it doesn't matter what sins we commit because we're ALL sinners. What matters is what's in our hearts and only we can decide what's in there. God's grace is a gift. We chose to accept it and go to heaven or not.

[Fyxe]

So God is a tyrant. Kudos to him. That doesn't make him any less God. And he's still gonna punish the crap out of you for not following him. Whatcha gonna do about it, eh? What if Christians are right and there is a God who's shaking his fist at us and smiting people? He's gonna send ya to hell for not following him. So, alrighty then. Condemn yourself.

Ah, I take it you're the type of person who'd go along with a ruthless dictator as long as you didn't get killed yourself then.

Selfish belief in Christianity to save one's own skin is a seriously twisted concept.

[wisp]

You want to learn about the love of God, read this. I wrote this straight from the Bible and it does show the love of God as our Heavenly father. This is a story told by Jesus about the father.

We're here to debate, not to be preached at. I'm sure most if not all of us know this basic parable, and would like to keep this debate as a debate rather than a Bible lesson. You posted it once, so you don't need to quote it and basically REpost it.


And SOAP - It's not a matter of my 'not listening.' We're on completely different tangents here, it seems. I understand what you're saying, and I've tried to come up with a better explanation of what I'm trying to say but nothing is coming out clearly so I'm going to drop it for now. My thinking patterns are extremely abstract and always have been, and it's hard to word what I say so that the entirety of what I'm thinking gets in there.

Edited by wisp, 08 May 2007 - 08:57 PM.