Debate With Paul S

[Ouroboros]

So let's at it Paul. I'll be the moderator in the thread, and I'll try my best to keep everyone around one or just a few open discussions simultaneous, to avoid too much confusion.

 

We'll discuss the fundamentals of Christianity, from your POV. And I'll allow Bible verses etc, but be prepared that I'll (we will) also use them as see fit. And also do understand that we might take in viewpoints from other denominations of Christiantiy and also other religions to point out other meanings or interpretations of the Bible verses.

 

So, let's start with a question from me: Why do someone need to be saved?

[Amanda]

So, let's start with a question from me: Why do someone need to be saved?

 

Perhaps from internal torment and/or internal emptiness, caused from our own condemnation of self and others.

 

BTW, Happy 4th of July to all my USA friends, or friends celebrating it with us in the USA!

[Ouroboros]

Happy Independence Day to you too. Yay! I'm independent of any faith. This day is a celebration of freedom for religion.

 

To your answer Amanda, if "sin" is "lack" of something, then yeah, maybe that's why. Salvation is to fill the void. Maybe it's just filling the need to believe in something higher that constitutes salvation? Some people need a religion or a faith, and some grow out of it. But the ones that are empty and need a faith, they're the ones that need "salvation".

[♦ nivek ♦]

Hans, Paul;

 

Pinned topic, should be interesting.

 

Others, please keep ANY response topical and non-derailing. Such will be nuked without mercy or warning.

 

kL

[Amanda]

With all due respect Nivek, I do NOT mean to derail the topic... but...

 

Happy Independence Day to you too. Yay! I'm independent of any faith. This day is a celebration of freedom for religion.

HanSolo, I think you meant freedom from religion, not for religion. :ohmy:

 

 

 

To your answer Amanda, if "sin" is "lack" of something, then yeah, maybe that's why. Salvation is to fill the void. Maybe it's just filling the need to believe in something higher that constitutes salvation? Some people need a religion or a faith, and some grow out of it. But the ones that are empty and need a faith, they're the ones that need "salvation".

HanSolo, I think back then the emotions were very closely related to their concept of spirituality. Maybe it really is.

 

What I think they were saying about sin, is that it is something that drains a vital force within us, that gives us the will to thrive, therefore considered eventual death to this life force. It could be to self or others. Anything that enhances this force, brings life.

 

It is said that not all sins bring death. I think those that do not, are just known as missing the mark. So what? Try again! hehe

 

However, there is one sin that brings death... and I think that is condemnation. The fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is judgment. Knowing good and evil gave us the ability to judge. Judging is good, but not the forbidden fruit of judgement, judging unto condemnation. Eve did it when she thought she wasn't good enough, because she wasn't 'like God'. Adam was the first one who spoke condemnation against another, it was the woman's fault, and God's for giving her to him! Then Eve blamed the devil. It's been someone else's fault, God's, or the devil's ever since.

 

The Bible is pretty much oriented against condemnation. By one man condemnation came upon all men. We know that these are just fables, however important morals to them, IMO. Condemning obviously can take the life force from the person receiving the condemnation, and the one who does the condemning vacates their responsibility to rectifying the situation at hand. If we could all judge unto victory, towards solutions, wouldn't that be better? Couldn't both aspects of condemnation be known to drain the force of life, within us?

[Ouroboros]

Hans, Paul;

 

Pinned topic, should be interesting.

Thanks N. I just wonder where the heck our guest went?

 

 

Happy Independence Day to you too. Yay! I'm independent of any faith. This day is a celebration of freedom for religion.

HanSolo, I think you meant freedom from religion, not for religion. :ohmy:

Ouch. Very true. I meant "from".

[duderonomy]

Han,

You say 'we' a lot in your proposal, yet you also claim that you will be moderator in this thread.

Isn't that a lot like God saying that He will be The Judge of All, yet giving us free will to be ourselves? Or like the Fox that promises to guard the henhouse?

 

And so few replies...(sigh)...

 

Just boppin' in, me amigo, to push the One True Thread...

 

"I'll Play the Fundie". It's all you need!

 

Except for that elusive 'burp' smiley.

 

 

I'm Duderonomy, and I approve this message.

 

Until tomorrow, when I shall forget what I said.

[Ouroboros]

I am god, so what's your question?

[Amanda]

I'm curious as to why people don't like Paul. He seems to be the least favorite character of everyone, Christians and NonChristians alike.

[Ouroboros]

I don't think I said that I don't like him.

 

His harmonization of the resurrection was pretty clever, even if I don't agree to the method. Still I respect when people think outside the box.

[NotBlinded]

I don't think I said that I don't like him.

 

His harmonization of the resurrection was pretty clever, even if I don't agree to the method. Still I respect when people think outside the box.

Hans...you didn't answer right. When you said this:

I am god, so what's your question?

 

Amanda said this:

 

I'm curious as to why people don't like Paul. He seems to be the least favorite character of everyone, Christians and NonChristians alike.

 

Now, answer like a god would, would ya? (Some people never play by the rules! )

[Ouroboros]

Hmm... I didn't see Amanda's post as a question. But you did have a question, if I would answer like a god.

 

Well, here's the true and most common answer a god gives: NO!

 

 

 

 

 

Okay, after re-reading Amanda's post, sure it's kind of a question. So my god answer to Amanda is:

 

No one hates Paul. We love Paul, we just don't like what he thinks he knows and what he's saying. (Hate the sin, but love the sinner)

 

 

 

(Will this newly found godhood mean that someone has to be the evil counterpart? )

[NotBlinded]

Once again, I was just teasing. She may not have meant it that way at all. I just found it funny and it gave me another opportunity to pick on you oh godly one. :-}

[Ouroboros]

I know you did. (Uuuuuh That sounds like omniscience!)

 

Back to the real purpose of the thread. I haven't heard one thing from Paul. So I guess we can unpin this topic. No need to stay on top, unless someone really picks up on the discussion.

 

What is the answer to "why does someone needs to be saved?"

 

Is it because of "original sin"? Which contradicts Eze 18.

 

Or is it because we have a sinful nature, so we can't help to sin, and need the help to be "moral"? Well, statistics doesn't support that. There's no difference between Christians or non-Christians when it comes to crime. It might be rather the opposite. And I heard Christians are more likely to divorce. And with all the Creationists and IDists lies and misconceptions about evolution and science, I'd say Christians love to tell lies or unsubstantiated claims, and don't seem to even excuse themselves when exposed or ask for forgiveness.

 

Is it because everyone is a sinner, and have a sinful nature, but can get forgiveness each time they sin? That's a scary thought! Murder someone and ask God for forgiveness and your home free. That's a sign of moral breakdown in society!

 

Is it because it's the ticket to Heaven? That takes belief before you can become a believer. You have to believe in Heaven and God before you can believe there is a way to get there. So it would only apply for someone that already are religious minded. Then it can't apply to atheists.

 

What else? What other reasons have I forgotten?

[Paul_S]

[i have a lot on my plate, that I have not gotten to yet. Chew, chew.]

 

Why does someone need to be saved?

 

Because of personal sin and guilt. Being self condemed before a holy and just God. [Romans 3:23; 1 John 3:20.]

[Ouroboros]

Two new questions to you Paul. Because we need to get to the bottom of this.

 

What is "sin"?

 

And how do you know that I have this guilt or "sin"? Or more exact, what/which kind do I have?

 

What "sin" have I done?

 

What "guilt" do I have? I don't feel any, so tell me what am I guilty off, and should feel guilt for?

[Amanda]

Two new questions to you Paul.

 

HanSolo, once Paul answers your questions, I would like to do so too... or do you already know my position?

 

And NBBTB, I wasn't asking HanSolo for a response as if it were from god... although he is one.

[Ouroboros]

HanSolo, once Paul answers your questions, I would like to do so too... or do you already know my position?

Not sure. But I know it will be good coming from you.

 

And NBBTB, I wasn't asking HanSolo for a response as if it were from god... although he is one.

Hey! That was a Secret!

 

We are all gods, yer know that already.

 

--edit--

 

I scrolled up, and I had totally forgotten that I claimed godhood in this particular thread!

[NotBlinded]

And NBBTB, I wasn't asking HanSolo for a response as if it were from god... although he is one.

It was funny though!

 

Because of personal sin and guilt. Being self condemed before a holy and just God. [Romans 3:23; 1 John 3:20.]

Indeed...that is where the condemnation lays and only there (IMO).

[Ouroboros]

And NBBTB, I wasn't asking HanSolo for a response as if it were from god... although he is one.

It was funny though!

Damn! I forgot that I claimed to be God last week, didn't I? A God can't forget or change his mind, so I guess I'm going to be demoted to a demiurge or worse maybe I'm only going to be taking care of the Hell hole of rotten carrots from now on.

 

Because of personal sin and guilt. Being self condemed before a holy and just God. [Romans 3:23; 1 John 3:20.]

Indeed...that is where the condemnation lays and only there (IMO).

Yup. So we need only to be "saved" from our own feeling of guilt. And I'm sure any psychiatrist can add to this part, with insight on how "guilt" can drive people to do the most outrageous things. Guilt is a fearsome enemy to many human minds, so in that sense, "salvation" can be good. But funny though, that I got rid of more guilt when deconverting! I don't have to walk around and look over my shoulder that I've kept God pleased with my actions all the time.

 

(moved topic to Lion's Den. Don't think there's going to be any serious talk in this topic.)

[Variable]

I'm curious as to why people don't like Paul. He seems to be the least favorite character of everyone, Christians and NonChristians alike.

 

Because Paul condoned slavery, told women to be quiet and submissive, and hallucinated when he fell off his horse and hit his head.

[Amanda]

I'm curious as to why people don't like Paul. He seems to be the least favorite character of everyone, Christians and NonChristians alike.

 

Because Paul condoned slavery, told women to be quiet and submissive, and hallucinated when he fell off his horse and hit his head.

Hi Variable!

 

It seems to me that the character portrayed as Paul seems to be the one that most promotes universal salvation, all qualify regardless of anything.

 

It was my impression that of those days, it was clearly a male dominated society, and a time when men were head of their households... mostly because of the danger in the streets. The husband was to love his wife more than his own life. Heck, I would like it if the guys would just compromise. And, if you look at marriage as a business, then how can there be two equal bosses? It doesn't mean that both don't have input, and that sometimes one's opinion wins and the other doesn't... but if there is a time where there is a stalemate... I'm curious to know for those days, who do you think should have had the last say? Remember, times have changed drastically to what we have today.

 

Slavery was condoned by EVERYONE, and seems to have been normal for the day. I don't think it was racist as more socioeconomically determined. However... it seems that Paul was promoting to be fair and caring slave owners. One of these disciples in this story was a slave that decided to leave and go with "Jesus", I think Thomas.

 

Fell off his horse and hit his head? Are you speaking of his trip on the road to Demascus? IMO, that scripture was not a "literal" explanation of his experience. And yes, much of all these teachings seem to be mostly myth built around some kernel of truth... IMO.

 

Thanks for some insights as to why people do not like Paul!