posted on March 27, 2004 01:38:23 PM newIt does irritate me to see the people use the movie to validate their religion or as an article of faith.
Well....so far people are still free to do so. Would you take their right to do so if given the power to do so?
Basing your religious convictions/conversion on a movie is sacrilegious. I don't believe they BASE their convictions on this film. It's a film they can relate to and enjoy because of their faith.
Sacrilegious....now that's funny coming from an admitted atheist.
posted on March 27, 2004 01:55:33 PM newWell....so far people are still free to do so. Would you take their right to do so if given the power to do so?
How is it you jump from my critical analysis of an issue to the possibility of my denying someone their rights ?
You have the right to believe 2+2=5, and I have the right to point out the errors in such a belief.
I don't believe they BASE their convictions on this film. It's a film they can relate to and enjoy because of their faith.
So you don't buy into the statement " It is as it was" ?
Sacrilegious....now that's funny coming from an admitted atheist.
How is it funny pointing that out when debating christianity with "christians" who have never actually given critical analysis to their own religion ?
posted on March 27, 2004 02:11:01 PM newHow is it you jump from my critical analysis of an issue to the possibility of my denying someone their rights? I'm sure you saw the "?" in my question. I was trying to clarify if that's what you'd like to have happen since this subject gets under your skin so much.
You have the right to believe 2+2=5, and I have the right to point out the errors in such a belief. I fully agree.
So you don't buy into the statement " It is as it was"? I don't believe I've ever shared my religious convictions on these threads. And I have no intention of doing so now.
How is it funny pointing that out when debating christianity with "christians" who have never actually given critical analysis to their own religion?
sacrilegious =
One who steals sacred things.
A violation of something consecrated to God
Gross irreverence toward a hollowed person, place or thing.
And your judgement/opinion was funny....coming from
an atheist.
---
critical analysis to their own religion The thing is reamond, you don't know that....it's an assumption you make. Because some choose not to debate their religious beliefs with you doesn't automatically = they haven't done so themselves.
posted on March 27, 2004 02:20:14 PM newI don't believe they BASE their convictions on this film
I don't believe I've ever shared my religious convictions on these threads.
So you now agree that some do base their religious convictions on this film, just not you ?
[i]And your judgement/opinion was funny....coming from
an atheist.[/i]
How could it be ? Do you actually think that atheists are ignorant of religions ? Atheists as a group know more about christianity than christians do.
In this world, that's not funny, it is tragic.
The thing is reamond, you don't know that....it's an assumption you make. Because some choose not to debate their religious beliefs with you doesn't automatically = they haven't done so themselves.
You're absolutely wrong. I do know. I know by their writings and creeds and acts for 2000 years. We are not debating "their religious beliefs", we are in fact debating the core tenents of all christianity.
posted on March 27, 2004 02:32:25 PM newWe are not debating "their religious beliefs", we are in fact debating the core tenents of all christianity.
Reamond, why debate it at all. Since you believe, or think, or reason that Christianity is a myth, I'm curious to why you even take time to 'debate' anything about it.
If this movie does in fact bring people back to their faith, thats their thing.
I can tell you this. My brother took my Dad to go see this. Sure my dad has always been Catholic, but you know, the show up on Sunday and holiday type one.. there are lots of those.... well, he is in his 80's still gets around, and is of sound mind. You wouldn't believe the change in him. It actually did bring him back to his faith..he does attribute it to seeing the Passion, in all its guts and gore, and to see what his Christ went through for him, as he says.
I have yet to see it at all! I will. I cannot say that it will bring me back to the Catholic church, I doubt that. But maybe have more conviction in my own Christian faith. But it IS a movie. What you come out of the theater with, is everyone's own business.
So the debate is about what now?
I've missed stuff here, been laid up for a couple days, still am kinda.
__________________________________
"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known."- Carl Sagan
posted on March 27, 2004 03:41:26 PM newSo you now agree that some do base their religious convictions on this film, just not you ? I've not made any statements on this subject as it relates to my religious convictions. But I took "based" as being they didn't already have their convictions but obtained them from this film. I'm saying they didn't just 'get' them from this movie. If you're asking do some see this as a very close rendition of what their Bible tells them the way it happened....then yes would be my answer.
Do you actually think that atheists are ignorant of religions? I have no way of knowing, are there stats on this. I'd accept that some do and some don't. I'd buy that there are many atheists who haven't studied religion at all.....and just call themselves atheists because they don't believe haven't had any religious training or they don't hold the belief that there is a God.
You're absolutely wrong. I do know. I know by their writings and creeds and acts for 2000 years. You have formed one opinion and they have formed another, different opinion. Their's is based on 'faith' in Bibical teachings. Your's is not. If it can't logically be explained....then you just aren't buying it. Your choice....their choice to believe and accept their 'take' based having 'faith' in the areas that aren't so easily explained.
We are not debating "their religious beliefs", we are in fact debating the core tenents of all christianity. You are bringing their religious beliefs into play since you have formed the opinion that what they believe is not true, the foundation of their religion is wrong - un-acceptable. You've decided they have come to a 'wrong' conclusion.
Other's have argued the same thing since time began. That's why I won't 'debate' my faith with anyone. And that's why I accept those who practice other faiths....because I see common ground in all religions and I sure don't have any special 'insight' that I'm the only one who has the 'right' answer. I have chosen my own path, just as many others have.
posted on March 27, 2004 05:05:19 PM new
The reason it's called FAITH is because it cannot be proven. I can list a dozen facts and logical arguments that say God doesn't exist.
But I believe anyway.
God wants FAITH. If there was an easy logical proof of his existence, there would be no need for faith. Everything would be certain. Faith in what cannot be proven is much of the whole point in most religions, not just Christianity.
The film DOES affect people. I was raised a Christian and after high school went the route of the atheist (only briefly) and then the agnostic path. About three years ago, I got hooked on Buddhism (at least parts of it). There is a lot to be said about the philosophy of Buddhism- but I cannot really call it a religion.
Then I saw the movie, and it really did snap me back to where I should have been all along. I picked up a Bible and have been reading it off & on for a few weeks now. I feel better about things now than I have in years. It's all in the feelings INSIDE.
It has nothing to do with logic. Logically, intellectually you cannot believe. I think that's the trap.
I think this posting probably stirred the pot for a few more posts, eh?
--------------------------------------
We do not stop playing because we grow old. We grow old because we stop playing -- Anonymous
posted on March 27, 2004 08:06:15 PM new
Ummmm... Am I the only one who read ChristianCoffee's post ?
I am the one who said All christian doctrines are in doubt. They are all faith based. If they was no doubt, there could be no faith. However, are you claiming to be a Gnostic ? If so then you are a heretic according to official christian orthodoxy and considered no different than us atheists.
Reamond, why debate it at all.
Again, Did you not read ChristianCoffee's post -- quoted below?
What I have found comicial is the lack of replies to my post above: certain people wish to call Christianity a myth, but have no evidence to back it up.
Well I have backed it up. And when I do, I here from the "faithful" that it is all a matter of opinion and/or should not be discussed.
Well, the power of persuasion only works through communication. Preachers and the "faithful" are continuosly trying to persuade people to accept their beliefs, and they also do it through movies such as The Passion.
But when an atheist postiton is successfully argued to the obvious point that christians believe in something that lacks any rational and demonstrable support, it becomes something that is a matter of opinion or not for discussion !! LMAO !!!
No, it is christianity that is the baseless opinion.
posted on March 27, 2004 08:40:17 PM newBut when an atheist postiton is successfully argued to the obvious point that christians believe in something that lacks any rational and demonstrable support, it becomes something that is a matter of opinion or not for discussion !! LMAO !!!
Reamond, IT IS up for discussion, but debating is another thing.
I think replay said it best, when you say
[/i]when an atheist postiton is successfully argued to the obvious point[/i]that christians believe in something that lacks any rational and demonstrable support
its called FAITH. I can't say it any better than replay did. Faith is something you cannot touch, or smell, whatever, its something that only one can feel for themselves. Faith.
Ok Movietime....... my exciting Saturday night! LOL
__________________________________
"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known."- Carl Sagan
posted on March 27, 2004 09:23:31 PM new
I remember getting in "discussions" with the nuns over the wording of "...Thou shalt have no other gods before me". I put forth the argument that it doesn't say "There are no other gods", it's just yaweh the tirant war god insisting that he be first among gods....needless to say, my arguments went over like the proverbial fart in church
___________________________________
posted on March 27, 2004 10:32:11 PM new
You have not posted any facts, reamond. All you have are pre-suppositions of a heart too hardened to hear Gods call. Let me give you a few titles for you to look at, since you are so inclined to disparage Christianity, and promote your self will upon all of us here.
William Lane Craig: "The Son Rises; Historical Evidence of the Ressurection of Jesus"
Simon Greenleaf; "The Testimony of the Evangelists"
Frederic Kenyan; "Handbook on the Textual Critism of the New Testiment"
Josephus: The Antiquities 18.63-64
John McRay; "Archaeology and the New Testiment"
These are just for starters: maybe they will enhance your vocabulary a little bit, as well as straighten out your facts.
As to worshipping more then one God, that is the difficulty of a mere mortal understanding the entire concept of the Trinity. An easy way to explaine it would be the three forms of water: liquid, solid and gas. They are all water, just in different forms.
Jesus didn't commit suicide, He was put to death to reconcile us to God. He allowed it to happen: He followed the Lords will to the end. He was hung on a cross, died, and rose again. If you take the time to study the evidence, you would understand that.
Anyone who is a Christian understands what reamond is saying, because his heart is so hardened that he will look to anything other then Jesus and God. He wants his cake and be able to eat it too, but in the end "every knee shall bow, and every tongue will confess that Jesus is Lord."
Let me provide a few more facts for you to try to dispute with your circular logic:
The writings of buddah, who lived in 6th century BC, were not put into writing untill after the Christian era: almost 700 years.
Muhammad lived from 570-632 AD, and yet the koran wasn't put into writing unill 767 AD.
The letters of Paul were mostly written between 35-45 AD. Just a few years after the Risen Christ revealed Himself to Paul.
Upon examining Lukes historical data, he referred to 32 countries, 54 cities and nine islands, not making a single mistake. What logical basis would he have lying about the Ressurection of Christ?
You are right, some people will die for a lie, but not if they truly know the truth: 11 of the 12 apostles were put to grisly deaths (read about them in Foxxes Book of Martyers), and not a single one would denounce their beliefs.
It is so sad that people will try to tear down Christianity, a faith that is rooted in history, just so they can carry on living in sin the way that they do. Christianity is more then just a religion, it is a PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP with Jesus Christ. If you wish to dismiss it, then do so at your own peril. Frankly, before I became a born again Christian, I was a wiccan, practicing occultic and earthly ideas with several people for 15 years. Only when I tried to disprove the Bible was I drawn into it's truth: that Christ died for my sins, that He rose again, and He will return someday. I look foreward to that day when I hear His voice say, "Well done, good and faithful servant."
Let me close with a quote by Sir Lionel Luckhoo. He and his 245 consecutive murder aquittals have earned him a place in the Guinness Book of World Records. He studied the evidence for the Ressurection for several years before declaring:
"I say unequivocally that the evidence for the Ressurection of Jesus Christ is so overwhelming that it compels acceptance by proof which leaves absolutely no room for doubt."
Think on that, and thank you for the kind words everyone who has welcomed me here.
posted on March 28, 2004 08:36:16 PM new
But now, please indulge my questions.
Let's discuss the true nature of your religion.
Do you believe in free will ?
Do you believe your god is omnipotent (all powerful) and omniscient (all knowing)?
Does your god control everything or even have the abiltiy to control everything ?
First off, reamond, you have provided nothing to contridict what information I have provided for you. However, since you did ask these questions, I will gladly answer them.
1) Yes, I believe in free will. See, God wants us to CHOOSE Him, not be forced or coereced into accepting Him.
2) Yes, the Lord is all knowing, all seeing and all powerful.
3) Yes, the Lord can control everything: as a matter of fact, He is right now. See, if you bothered to take the time to read the Word of God (the Bible), you would understand that He is fofilling His propheses even as we speak. bu, I am sure you have a "logical" answer for this as well.
As to being soft in the head, I don't think so (though I am not the best speller in the world). But you must be, for thinking that there is no God. See, the Bible calls people like this FOOLS, and that is the worst thing that a person can be considered. I fully understand that you have made your choice, and it will lead to a sad end for you. One day you will understand, but by then it will most likly be too late.
posted on March 29, 2004 09:34:29 AM new1) Yes, I believe in free will. See, God wants us to CHOOSE Him, not be forced or coereced into accepting Him.
2) Yes, the Lord is all knowing, all seeing and all powerful.
3) Yes, the Lord can control everything: as a matter of fact, He is right now. See, if you bothered to take the time to read the Word of God (the Bible), you would understand that He is fofilling His propheses even as we speak. bu, I am sure you have a "logical" answer for this as well.
If your lord knows and controls all, the past, present and future, then you can not have free will. How can you have a "choice" when your creator and controller of everything knows what your "decsion" will be? You have admitted that under your mythology you have no more freedom of choice than a puppet on a string.
If your lord controls everything, then he/she also creates, controls and causes all evil. If not, then is something that your god can not control.
Regarding "logical" answers, you claim to be well read about your religion, but you apparently know nothing about christian gnostics, logos and the mystics. What you have been reading is propaganda from those who do not critically analyse their religion and want to convince you not to use critical thinking skills about their claims.
posted on March 29, 2004 11:23:13 AM new
If your lord knows and controls all, the past, present and future, then you can not have free will. How can you have a "choice" when your creator and controller of everything knows what your "decsion" will be? You have admitted that under your mythology you have no more freedom of choice than a puppet on a string.
If your lord controls everything, then he/she also creates, controls and causes all evil. If not, then is something that your god can not control.
Regarding "logical" answers, you claim to be well read about your religion, but you apparently know nothing about christian gnostics, logos and the mystics. What you have been reading is propaganda from those who do not critically analyse their religion and want to convince you not to use critical thinking skills about their claims.
Reamond, you are, and have been, totally missing the point. We all have free choice: that is where sin comes from, and your silly word games end. See, the evidence of God is insurmountable: the evidence of His Love for us also is. But, HE DOES NOT WANT US TO BE MINDLESS TOWARD HIM. He wants a relationship with us. We are not automated beings: we all have a soul.
See, this battle over our souls has gone on since God created man. Satan wants us to not trust God, not believe in Him, and to think as you do. Someday you may understand this.
God never caused evil: He is Holy and Pure. He cannot abide by sin: nor anything impure in His sight. That is why He sent Christ to earth in the first place. So, by His sacrifice, we may be made rightous and pure by the Blood of the Lamb.
And you, reamond, appearantly do not truly understand Christianity as it really is: trying to blow more smoke and mirrors with your last statement is just showing how sad your position really is. I will give you this much credit: it takes more FAITH to believe in nothing, as you do, then it takes for me to believe in a loving God; one who loves me so much He sent His Son to die on a Cross for me. There is so much evidence out there proving my points, but you appearantly have made up your mind. And I still see no true rebuttles for any of the facts i have listed in any of my posts. You remind me of those supposed scholors that were part of the Jesus Seminar a few years ago: already having their minds made up, wanting to cause a stir, and having no true facts or evidence to back them up. When you wish to enter into a discussion about something, reamond, I suggest you get your facts straight. Or, in the least, get some facts first so you may straighten them out for everyone. Your rants against Christianity just show not only how many holes you have in your "logic", but the huge hole you have in your heart and soul. One that can only be filled by the Spirit of God, and redeemed by the Blood of Christ.
posted on March 29, 2004 12:27:42 PM new
Well you have yet to address the severe problems with your "free choice" claims.
I haven't used any "word games". What I have used is rational and critical thought processes to prove that you must lack free choice if your god is what you say he is.
Now you have also claimed that your god did not create nor does he have control over evil.
So can you tell us unenlightened atheists just how a god that created and controls everything did not create evil and can not control evil ?
There are huge gaps in your positions that your god can not seem to fill.
Christianlty is mythology. No different that any other mythology.
Christ Movie Sparks Neo-Nazi Confession in Norway
Mon Mar 29, 2004 10:33 AM ET
OSLO (Reuters) - A Norwegian neo-Nazi has confessed to two bombings a decade ago after a pang of repentance triggered by watching Mel Gibson's controversial film "The Passion of the Christ."
Johnny Olsen, 41, went to police after watching the movie about the death of Christ to admit that he was behind the previously unexplained bombings against anarchist squatters in Oslo in the mid-1990s.
"The trigger that made him go to police and confess was that movie," his lawyer, Fridtjof Feydt, told Reuters Monday. He said his client had long been concerned with issues such as reconciliation and redemption.
The weekend confession prompted police to charge Olsen with arson. No one died in the bombings in 1994 and 1995 during a wave of street fights between neo-Nazis and anarchists.
It was at least the second confession sparked by Gibson's film, which has been criticized for graphic violence. A Texan man admitted last week, after seeing the movie, to murdering a 19-year-old woman who was pregnant with his child.
"This does not change my view of the film in the slightest," Oslo's Lutheran bishop Gunnar Staalsett told the Norwegian daily Verdens Gang Monday, reiterating his condemnation of the movie as glorifying sadism and torture.
******
Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
posted on March 29, 2004 06:03:36 PM new
"...condemnation of the movie as glorifying sadism and torture"
Can ANYONE honestly say that this movie GLORIFIES sadism and torture? Almost everyone is disgusted and sickened by it. I have yet to hear of anyone going out on a scourging-spree after having seen the movie. That guy is crazy. If there was ever a pro-non-violence movie, this is it.
----------------
My take on the free-will thing:
1) God is omniscient. He knows everything. He knows about the ant crawling up the back of your chair and that pencil you stole in third grade.
2) If he can know everything, it's not a big leap to suppose he has perfect memory as well. Since he knows everything and remembers it all, it logically follows that he knows the entire past as well.
3) Now the part about the future. This is where we have to decide for ourselves. In MY view he has the ability to see the future if he wants to, this is where the various prophecies come from.
I don't think he consciously knows every bit of the future... why would anyone want to? What would be the point of his own existence if he knew his own future to the total extent? He can look ahead IF HE WANTS to, but doesn't WANT to know everything ahead of time.
But then again, I'm only human and cannot conceive of know all things for all eternity, so I could be wrong. It would be nice if I could see the future, but I wouldn't want to see ALL of it.
And we do have free will. He wants to see our choices. This is why evil exists. Yes, God created the Devil and and allows evil to exist and grow as well, just to see our choices. He wants you to choose his path, but if you choose another, he will let you do that.
--------------------------------------
We do not stop playing because we grow old. We grow old because we stop playing -- Anonymous
posted on March 29, 2004 06:21:26 PM newIt was at least the second confession sparked by Gibson's film, which has been criticized for graphic violence. A Texan man admitted last week, after seeing the movie, to murdering a 19-year-old woman who was pregnant with his child.
That, I don't understand. It is the most horrible thing, BUT, did he kill her, then see the movie and confess. Or is it saying the movie moved him to kill his girlfriend???
As it reads, the article is making out like this movie is having people break down and confess, which is a good thing in its way, NOT the crimes, but confessing to what they did, and getting the punishment deserved?
__________________________________
"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known."- Carl Sagan
posted on March 29, 2004 08:04:38 PM new3) Now the part about the future. This is where we have to decide for ourselves. In MY view he has the ability to see the future if he wants to, this is where the various prophecies come from.
Well, no, we can not "decide" for ourselves if we are christians. The christian god knows all, past, present, and future. The christian god doesn't selectivly decide not apprehend the future. That is unless you wish to do away with the bible.
I don't think he consciously knows every bit of the future... why would anyone want to? What would be the point of his own existence if he knew his own future to the total extent? He can look ahead IF HE WANTS to, but doesn't WANT to know everything ahead of time.
You are applying human traits to your god. But you're not the first, the Romans and Greeks did also. In any event, it does not follow christian doctrine to apply these human traits to god.
And we do have free will.
No, in christian doctrine, the most we could state is that we at least have the delusion of free will.
He wants to see our choices. This is why evil exists. Yes, God created the Devil and and allows evil to exist and grow as well, just to see our choices. He wants you to choose his path, but if you choose another, he will let you do that.
You define a rather cruel god, who seems to have invented humans as some sort of sadistic play things. But what you have described is not christian orthodox doctrine.
However, I will give you this-- in all of history, no christian theologian has been able to reconcile the assertion of free will and an all knowing god. What christians used to do was to kill anyone who brought the subject up or taught pre-determination.
Many will brush the problem off as one of those "mystic" god things we can never know. Others do their damnedest to dance around the 800 pound gorilla without any luck in making it disappear.
It is interesting that all of the christians that I have ever discussed these heresies with, they always describe a god that is outside the bounds of christian orthodoxy, in fact they describe a god that could not be the christian god.
That's another reason why I think it is a great mistake to call our country "christian" or believe the number of people who claim themselves to be christian. When pressed on the matter, they're not really christian at all, but what would be better described as a modern pagans.
posted on March 29, 2004 09:34:59 PM newThat, I don't understand. It is the most horrible thing, BUT, did he kill her, then see the movie and confess. Or is it saying the movie moved him to kill his girlfriend???
No, he'd already killed her when he saw the film. I read it in the news last week. Evidently, he'd made it look like suicide, using ideas he got off of CSI or similar show and gotten away with it. Then he saw "Passion," and confessed to the murder.
******
Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
posted on March 29, 2004 09:42:47 PM new
Modern pagans.....whatever your on, I would like some of it...lol
If you understood history, you would see the valid, proven points that have been made. However, like I had said before, your circular word-speak (for lack of a better term) really shows how little you really know and understand about Christianity as a whole, and world history in general.
God is not cruel. He wants all of us with Him. However, that is why He gives us free will: so it is a choice we can make, to love and obey Him as best we can, or to spit in His face and say we do not need Him.
As to evil, Lucifer was a created being, God's C-n-C of the angles as it were. God allowed him to make his own choice, and that choice was to rebel against God. God cast Satan down from Heaven, and allowed him to set up residence here on earth, as it were.
God hates everything that is not pure: we are not pure. We have a sinful nature. How often do we have to remind our children to behave? we never have to remind them to be "bad", because it is our inheret nature. It is residue from the fall of man in the Garden of Eden. It is our curse.
God provided a way out. In the OT, the Jews had to sacrifice pure animals to atone for the sins of the nation. Sadly, God needed something more. That is why He sent His Son to earth, to die as a ransom for many. We all have a choice: to follow Jesus or not to follow Jesus. We make that choice: God doesn't make it for us. We choose our path in this respect, and this is our free-will. We choose, not God. He provides us with the oppertunity to choose. That is how much He loves us: not only to send His Son to die for us, but to allow us to make the choice weather to follow Him or not.
This is the crux, and what it all boils down to: follow Christ and receive Eternal Life, or reject Him and be sentenced to death. No, worse then death: eternal seperation from the loving God who created all things.
Despite your "best" efferts, reamond, you have yet to provide any evidence to truly dispute what I have posted here. You can believe what you want to (free-will), and you can try to cloud the truth, but in the end it will not matter. "For you shall know the Truth, and the Truth shall set you free."
Christ came, He died, and He rose again. There are mounds of evidence, more then what I have posted here. These are truths you just do not want to try to understand. I am sure others here may want to research further into what I have said. Look to the few books I have previously mentioned: read them and see for yourself. Check information with reliable sources, not with slanted views provided by some people who provide mis-information. Then decide for yourself. This is our free will. If anyone wishes to contact me by email, my alternate address is [email protected]. i will answer any sincere questions in this regard, and be more then happy to communicate with my fellow Christians.
posted on March 29, 2004 10:00:40 PM newGod is not cruel. He wants all of us with Him. However, that is why He gives us free will: so it is a choice we can make, to love and obey Him as best we can, or to spit in His face and say we do not need Him.
I don't know, a god who demands that a man kill his own son, then at the last minute says (to paraphrase) "Sorry, just testing to see if you would" seems pretty cruel to me. Not tomention supposedly giving his creations free will then destroying them when they exercise it...
As to evil, Lucifer was a created being, God's C-n-C of the angles as it were. God allowed him to make his own choice, and that choice was to rebel against God. God cast Satan down from Heaven, and allowed him to set up residence here on earth, as it were.
Actually, Lucifer is a stolen being, as is much of Christianity. He is from an earlier religion & his name meant "bringer of light." Christians chose to take him over & make him "evil."
God hates everything that is not pure: we are not pure. We have a sinful nature. How often do we have to remind our children to behave? we never have to remind them to be "bad", because it is our inheret nature. It is residue from the fall of man in the Garden of Eden. It is our curse.
So your god hates you? And you worship someone who hates you? Pretty twisted.
God provided a way out. In the OT, the Jews had to sacrifice pure animals to atone for the sins of the nation. Sadly, God needed something more. That is why He sent His Son to earth, to die as a ransom for many.
If you have to "atone" you really don't have free will. It's "do as I want or be punished."
This is the crux, and what it all boils down to: follow Christ and receive Eternal Life, or reject Him and be sentenced to death. No, worse then death: eternal seperation from the loving God who created all things.
And that's another thing. All those folks who lived and died before the Jewish god came on the scene, and before Christ was born are supposedly condemned simply because they didn't worship him. What a loving god...
******
Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
posted on March 29, 2004 11:03:11 PM new
You know, I may never understand why God would tolerate Lucifer, being a mere disgruntled subordinate that he is, snuffing out Lucifer would be breeze!
I mean come on, God has no problem with committing wholesale killing and does on occasion commission others to kill innocent men women and children. So killing Lucifer would be no big deal! And what a stumbling block in the path to God he has been.
If he would have taken care of this problem long ago, his only son could have been spared such a miserable death. Poor planing, I guess.
What is up with this Adam and Eve deal? I didn't even know the couple and here now thousands of years later, I hear we are still suffering for the actions of these two. I feel we have been treated unfairly and am presently contemplating initiating a class-action law suit for reparations. Just a few thoughts!
posted on March 30, 2004 01:14:57 PM new
Well ChristianCoffee you seem to want to address the contradictions of your religion with meaningless preaching.
Either we do not have free will or your god does not know all and is not powerful. And I guess now we have also driven the argument soundly to the conclusion that your god is actually quite cruel and spiteful.
You're just another example of a "christian" that doesn't even have a grasp of his own religion and can not face the contradictions about their god and religion.
posted on March 30, 2004 02:24:10 PM newRegular logic need not apply.
If such were the case, then it really makes no difference what god or gods you worship as they would all have the same untestable validity. Again, this does not comport with christian orthodoxy and is unacceptable to christian teachings.
Although the article you linked addresses only passingly the free will doctrine of mere mortals, it does address several other heresies.
There are "christians" that have attended church their whole lives and have never been exposed to these contradictions. Don't count on a christian preacher to bring them up.
posted on March 30, 2004 07:27:48 PM new
Religion and belief in a creator are matters of faith, not "proof". ChristianCoffee, your need to "prove" the truth of Jesus to others is proof enough to me that you lack the courage of your faith. If you had it, you'd have no need to prove it to others...
___________________________________
This topic is 10 pages long: 1new2new3new4new5new6new7new8new9new10new
I'd accept that some do and some don't. I'd buy that there are many atheists who haven't studied religion at all.....and just call themselves atheists because they don't believe haven't had any religious training or they don't hold the belief that there is a God.
Now Fred, how come you don't come here more often!