Jump to content

How Is Christianity Reasonable


Celsus
 Share

Recommended Posts

This is an open invitation to any Christian who supports the orthodox (Nicean Creed) view of Christianity. Please explain why you think it is reasonable to believe the following basis of orthodox Christianity is factual?

  1. A talking snake tempted the mother of all humanity and she tempted the father of all humanity and thus they sinned.
  2. All humans are thus tainted with the original sin, instigated by a talking snake.
  3. God fathered a son by a human woman, who is also the same god as his father.
  4. God the son died to pay the price to himself (god the father who is also somehow the same person as god the son), for the sin instigated by the talking snake. (see 1 & 2)
  5. God the son came back to life and flew off into the sky.
  6. If I just believe 3, 4 & 5, I will go to heaven and not have to pay the price for the sin caused by the talking snake (1 & 2).

I look forward to a logical explanation on why a reasonable person should give this any consideration.

 

Bruce

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Replies 212
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1) In the beginning, the Earth wasn't cursed. You know from the book of Genesis that 'the snake' was cursed to slide along on it's belly. If 'the snake' had done that before, how would that then be a curse?

 

2) Well, you believe it or you don't. Were you there in a pre-cursed world? How much do you know about snakes or Satan today even? As for 'original sin', why do doctors tell us to this day that 'you can't choose your parents'? So much IS genetic!

 

3) My father too had a son by a human woman. I guess I am half mom and half dad.

 

4) Enough about the snake, already! Jesus died to pay the price for US, and nothing else. Do you need chapter and verse? I mean, if you set something in motion, be it life, death, sin, forgivness, redemption, etc... wouldn't you want to see it through to it's logical conclusion? Or would it just be a video game to you, where you can start over again tomorrow and none the wiser and no harm no foul? Are you sure that this is how God would think? Another answer to this question would be, have you ever paid off your own debt?

 

5) If I said yes, and you said no, what would that solve? It could happen.

 

6) I f*ck*ng HATE math!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an open invitation to any Christian who supports the orthodox (Nicean Creed) view of Christianity. Please explain why you think it is

Bruce

 

 

Jesuschrist! If you read this you see how unreasonable this is. A talking snake? Presumably evil? Where did he come from? If god created all things then he also created evil and the whole garden thing was a set up.

More evidence of babble fairy tales and the whole irrelevancy of gods and religions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bruce,

 

I'm not a Christian...you know that. And in coming back to this thread I see that it was for Christians only, and you even put it in bold! I'm really embarassed that I plowed through and didn't even see that.

 

I hope there some Christians on here that will respond, from their many points of view. Sorry for the butt-in.

 

:Doh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an open invitation to any Christian who supports the orthodox (Nicean Creed) view of Christianity. Please explain why you think it is reasonable to believe the following basis of orthodox Christianity is factual?

  1. A talking snake tempted the mother of all humanity and she tempted the father of all humanity and thus they sinned.
  2. All humans are thus tainted with the original sin, instigated by a talking snake.
  3. God fathered a son by a human woman, who is also the same god as his father.
  4. God the son died to pay the price to himself (god the father who is also somehow the same person as god the son), for the sin instigated by the talking snake. (see 1 & 2)
  5. God the son came back to life and flew off into the sky.
  6. If I just believe 3, 4 & 5, I will go to heaven and not have to pay the price for the sin caused by the talking snake (1 & 2).

I look forward to a logical explanation on why a reasonable person should give this any consideration.

 

Bruce

First, the Nicean Creed errors from the word of God on two points. On the Son of God being begotten, and baptism toward forgiveness of sins.

 

And other Christians defend it. The Nicean Creed is not the standard, the word of God is.

 

Regarding the fall of man in the garden. If that is what happened. It is not unreasonable. If that did not happen, it may still be reasonable, but not true. Now if something must be true to be reasonable, then pure logic is not always reasonable. And the account if not true would not be reasonable.

 

All humans are tainted by that original sin in that all have inherited that knowledge of good and evil.

 

The child that God fathered by the Holy Spirit was God's Son from eternity. The Nicean Creed teaches that, even though they got the use of the term 'begotten' wrong. The Son was the uniquely begotten Son, in that He was always the Son and never was not the Son. The term begotten in the bible, in refering to God's Son, refers to the Son's resurrection from the dead (Acts 13:33; Romans 1:4.) He took on human from by being born of a human woman (Galatians 4:4.)

 

God paid nothing to Himself. Rather, the Son as a substitute for us humans (Isaiah 53:6,) received payment do to us for sins which He didn't commit. It was what we should and can yet receive (Revelation 20:11-15; 21:8.) That payment was death (Romans 6:23. Romans 3:23-26. 1 John 2:1,2.)

 

And yes, a key belief of the Christian faith is that Jesus the Christ rose from the dead and ascended bodily to the right hand of God (1 Timothy 2:5.) Now bear in mind if this is even true, then all of the Christian faith is reasonable. Of course, if not, then it is all unreasonable.

 

Let's see:

A 6 day creation and fall of man.

A virgin birth of a male child.

A man coming back from the dead after being dead three days at room temperature.

 

Basically, either these are not true or these are supernatural events. Beyond any known science.

 

Now if those things are true, then it is not really unreasonble to believe such.

 

Now no one is lost because of what another did. In other words, none of us are held responsible for what Adam did. We are held responsible for what we do and did. (Revelation 20:11-15.)(Romans 5:12; Deuteronomy 24:16.)

 

My problem, you didn't really get your questions correct. (Some contained some false ideas.)

 

One is saved, if God saves them (John 1:12, 13, 2 Corinthians 5:17.) And if someone knows God (John 17:3) and so has eternal life. They would have to lie to deny it. (1 John 5:9-13; 2 Corinthians 13:5.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather, the Son as a substitute for us humans (Isaiah 53:6,) received payment do to us for sins which He didn't commit

 

Is 53 is not talking about a son, but rather a servant. So is Jesus a servant to himself?

 

Off course the grand context of Is 45-55 shows the servant is Isreal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Paul_S and welcome to the forum.

 

 

Basically, either these are not true or these are supernatural events. Beyond any known science.

 

Now if those things are true, then it is not really unreasonble to believe such.

 

Or maybe they are just stories. Or maybe myths encoding deeper spiritual truths? The problem comes when you take it all as literally true or untrue.

 

You use the word "If" Paul and thats the crux of the issue. We cannot know 100% what did or did not happen as the Earth formed, or at the time of Jesus, because we were not there.

 

What we do have though is the scientific approach, which looks at the evidence and tries to make the best "story" of what happened. That is the use of reason. Given the evidence, what is the best story we can come up with as to what happened (and we may need to refine that as more evidence comes to light). It is reasonable to assume that the above supernatural events didn,t happen because they are not happening now. Virgins don,t give birth to children. People don,t walk on water, or turn water into wine, or go to the local cemetery and raise people from the dead. So it is reasonable to assume that they didn,t then.......it would be unreasonable to assume they did given how things are now.

 

Christianity starts from a highly irrational position (assuming you think it is literally true). It basically says that "God writes books". That the bible is true ....because it says its true. But anyone with a modicum of historical knowledge can go back and see how the catholic church of the time selected the books they wanted to be included, and anaethematized those they did not. This was done over time at various councils of bishops, who voted on it. If you didn,t agree with the vote , you either signed up, or, were made an outcast.

 

 

So the whole starting position is irrational to begin with.......that certain people were privy to god's absolute opinions. (Which the muslims know is not true, because, of course, they have the absolute opinions of god; or is it the jews; or the hindus; or.....you get the point!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Now no one is lost because of what another did. In other words, none of us are held responsible for what Adam did. We are held responsible for what we do and did. (Revelation 20:11-15.)(Romans 5:12; Deuteronomy 24:16.)"

 

Paul, you are wrong. You quote Roman's chapter five, but fail so see (or say) that the whole chapter is about the first man Adam passing sin and death to all, and the second 'Adam', Jesus, by virtue of his sacrifice, passes forgivness and life to all.

 

For example, vs. 19: "For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous."

 

If we forget the creeds and use the Bible exclusively, Christianity still makes no sense. God paid nothing to Himself you say? But Jesus, who 'paid the price', is God, right (John 1:1)? And that very Word, which was with God, and was God, was 'made flesh' (vs. 14), and dwelt among us. So then, who died on the cross? The human Jesus or the God Jesus? According to your Bible they are one and the same, hypostatic union or not. God died to pay the penalty that God demanded, while I'm caught in the middle of all this because of Adam, who ate the fruit instead of slapping his woman silly and asking God for another one.

 

Maybe Adam should have picked a helpmeet from one of the animals that God paraded in front of him (ladies, don't jump on me for this, I'm discussing Bible...).

 

 

Also Paul, you said;

 

"Now if those things are true, then it is not really unreasonble to believe such."

 

No, it's not unreasonable at all to believe this if it's true. But it's not, unless you have proof that it is, and if so, would you please present this proof?

 

Thanks, Duder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No, it's not unreasonable at all to believe this if it's true. But it's not, unless you have proof that it is, and if so, would you please present this proof?

 

Thanks, Duder

 

Yep! That'st he problem! Where's the proof? I think that's all that most people are asking for. Its not like they view the loving ideas as a bad thing (where, some do of course, regarding the god of the P killing thousands of peeps) But seriously, where is the proof?

 

Is there historical proof of the Garden of Eden? No, is there historcal proof of a world-wide flood? No, but there are proofs of large floods I think, but not a world-wide one. Instead the scientists end up coming up with proof for a meteor, and all this other crazy stuff that just doesnt agree with the bible :vent:

 

I wish that it was true, I really do, because I love the idea personally. But I cant fnid proof of it so then I cant believe in it. I wish I could, I really do.. Because my whole life has been brought up on this.

 

I have witnessed crazy gtings in my life. I have seen my mom know things that nobody told her about me, that I didnt tell anyone.. That she got from "God" - Many times! This is the only reason why I sometimes rebelieve. But I just wish it really made reasonable sense, it does not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

velocitychild,

 

I know what you mean. My mom claimed to have certain inside information, whether from God or a 'little birdie' many times. It did weird me out sometimes, but I think a lot of it was her just being a very good mom.

 

Sometimes, mom's just know, because they're mom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest patster14

This is an open invitation to any Christian who supports the orthodox (Nicean Creed) view of Christianity. Please explain why you think it is reasonable to believe the following basis of orthodox Christianity is factual?

  1. A talking snake tempted the mother of all humanity and she tempted the father of all humanity and thus they sinned.
  2. All humans are thus tainted with the original sin, instigated by a talking snake.
  3. God fathered a son by a human woman, who is also the same god as his father.
  4. God the son died to pay the price to himself (god the father who is also somehow the same person as god the son), for the sin instigated by the talking snake. (see 1 & 2)
  5. God the son came back to life and flew off into the sky.
  6. If I just believe 3, 4 & 5, I will go to heaven and not have to pay the price for the sin caused by the talking snake (1 & 2).

I look forward to a logical explanation on why a reasonable person should give this any consideration.

 

Bruce

bruce your answers,

1) adam and eve lived in eden which had no extridition treaty with the u.s. so eve smoked as much pot as she wanted!

2)God was against a growth in population, and so when a high eve played with adams snake, hey were cast out to look for wellfare or construction jobs

3)god is so big that he would mess with gravity so he sent his robot that he controled with his playstation to allow for atonement of people who were playin with snakes

4)the apostles distributed reefer to any witnesses and then shot jesus out of a catapult

hey, people have believed much crazier shit

 

This is an open invitation to any Christian who supports the orthodox (Nicean Creed) view of Christianity. Please explain why you think it is reasonable to believe the following basis of orthodox Christianity is factual?

  1. A talking snake tempted the mother of all humanity and she tempted the father of all humanity and thus they sinned.
  2. All humans are thus tainted with the original sin, instigated by a talking snake.
  3. God fathered a son by a human woman, who is also the same god as his father.
  4. God the son died to pay the price to himself (god the father who is also somehow the same person as god the son), for the sin instigated by the talking snake. (see 1 & 2)
  5. God the son came back to life and flew off into the sky.
  6. If I just believe 3, 4 & 5, I will go to heaven and not have to pay the price for the sin caused by the talking snake (1 & 2).

I look forward to a logical explanation on why a reasonable person should give this any consideration.

 

Bruce

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Patster14,

 

You can't leave it to real Christians to answer? I jumped in without reading the O.P...maybe you did too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I'm not going to go into this too far - but here are the basics:

 

The book of Genesis is a giant metaphor. Humans could not possibly understand how it all started, so God wrote a nice simple story for us. Yay..

 

As for 2,3,4,5 - they are only hard to believe in today's society where we have a strong definition of what is scientifically possible.

 

And 6 - The Church would have us believe that if you accept Jesus you will go to heaven, and if you don't you will go to hell. This is just a hugely distorted image that they have given us in an attempt to control us. In actual fact, it goes much deeper than that. There is NO hell! Only a spiritual realm where we all go when we die. God does not want non-believers punished like the Church would have us believe. And I find that this is the main point atheists base their arguments on.

 

And i'm too tired to write more at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Bruce: A talking snake tempted the mother of all humanity and she tempted the father of all humanity and thus they sinned.

 

What's the problem?

 

Bruce: All humans are thus tainted with the original sin, instigated by a talking snake.

 

Correct. Because Adam & Eve fell, mankind as a whole lost communion with God. Is this logical? In any case it seems to be supported by the evidence (i.e., something's wrong with the world) -- and in our world, feuds can last generations too.

 

Bruce: God fathered a son by a human woman, who is also the same god as his father.

 

Rather, He shares the divine nature with God the Father. Because God the Father has eternally been God the Father, the Son is eternal, too. The article Does Jesus's submission to the Father disprove his deity? might help clarifying some things.

 

Bruce: God the son died to pay the price to himself (god the father who is also somehow the same person as god the son), for the sin instigated by the talking snake. (see 1 & 2)

 

God the Son died to satisfy the Divine Justice. God the Father is not the same Person, but the same Being as God the Son. Although the sin was instigated by the talking snake (Satan -- whether disguised as a snake or manipulating the snake somehow), the first humans sinned.

 

Bruce: God the son came back to life and flew off into the sky.

 

He ascended. Flying is different from ascending. 'I flew off up the stairs'... :grin:

 

Bruce: If I just believe 3, 4 & 5, I will go to heaven and not have to pay the price for the sin caused by the talking snake (1 & 2).

 

Human sin, rather. But indeed: if you believe and know that your sin is a terrible offence against God and believe that Jesus died for you, 'He is faithful and just to forgive your sins'. Glenn Miller has written a long article explaining Penal Substitution as far as it can be explained (it does remain a mystery...but that shouldn't prevent us from looking into it). He ends with this great quote:

 

These are the essential points of our defense of God's providence: First, The restoration of Adam's apostate race was in no sense necessary to God's personal interest, glory, or selfish welfare. He is all-sufficient unto himself. He was infinitely blessed end happy in himself before Adam's race existed. When it fell, he could have vindicated his own glory, as he did in the case of Satan and his angels, by the condign punishment of all men. He could have created another world and another race, fairer than ours, to fill the chasm made by our fall. Second, The price which he paid in order to avoid this just result of sin in our fallen race was the death of the God-man. Since the co-equal Son was incarnate in him, he was a person dearer and greater in God's eyes than any world, or all the worlds together. Being infinite, God-Messiah bulks more largely in the dimensions of his being than all the creatures aggregated. He was more worthy and lovely in the Father's view than any holy creature, "But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." This great fact may not open to us the deep secret of the permission of evil -- perhaps no finite mind could fully comprehend it were its revelation attempted -- but the glorious sacrifice of love does prove that no defect of divine benevolence can have had part in this secret. Had there been in God's heart the least lack of infinite mercy, had there been a single fibre of indifference to the misery of his creatures, Christ would never have been given to die for the guilt of men.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bruce: A talking snake tempted the mother of all humanity and she tempted the father of all humanity and thus they sinned.

 

What's the problem?

 

Bruce: All humans are thus tainted with the original sin, instigated by a talking snake.

 

Correct. Because Adam & Eve fell, mankind as a whole lost communion with God. Is this logical? In any case it seems to be supported by the evidence (i.e., something's wrong with the world) -- and in our world, feuds can last generations too.

 

Bruce: God fathered a son by a human woman, who is also the same god as his father.

 

Rather, He shares the divine nature with God the Father. Because God the Father has eternally been God the Father, the Son is eternal, too. The article Does Jesus's submission to the Father disprove his deity? might help clarifying some things.

 

Bruce: God the son died to pay the price to himself (god the father who is also somehow the same person as god the son), for the sin instigated by the talking snake. (see 1 & 2)

 

God the Son died to satisfy the Divine Justice. God the Father is not the same Person, but the same Being as God the Son. Although the sin was instigated by the talking snake (Satan -- whether disguised as a snake or manipulating the snake somehow), the first humans sinned.

 

Bruce: God the son came back to life and flew off into the sky.

 

He ascended. Flying is different from ascending. 'I flew off up the stairs'... :grin:

 

Bruce: If I just believe 3, 4 & 5, I will go to heaven and not have to pay the price for the sin caused by the talking snake (1 & 2).

 

Human sin, rather. But indeed: if you believe and know that your sin is a terrible offence against God and believe that Jesus died for you, 'He is faithful and just to forgive your sins'. Glenn Miller has written a long article explaining Penal Substitution as far as it can be explained (it does remain a mystery...but that shouldn't prevent us from looking into it). He ends with this great quote:

 

These are the essential points of our defense of God's providence: First, The restoration of Adam's apostate race was in no sense necessary to God's personal interest, glory, or selfish welfare. He is all-sufficient unto himself. He was infinitely blessed end happy in himself before Adam's race existed. When it fell, he could have vindicated his own glory, as he did in the case of Satan and his angels, by the condign punishment of all men. He could have created another world and another race, fairer than ours, to fill the chasm made by our fall. Second, The price which he paid in order to avoid this just result of sin in our fallen race was the death of the God-man. Since the co-equal Son was incarnate in him, he was a person dearer and greater in God's eyes than any world, or all the worlds together. Being infinite, God-Messiah bulks more largely in the dimensions of his being than all the creatures aggregated. He was more worthy and lovely in the Father's view than any holy creature, "But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." This great fact may not open to us the deep secret of the permission of evil -- perhaps no finite mind could fully comprehend it were its revelation attempted -- but the glorious sacrifice of love does prove that no defect of divine benevolence can have had part in this secret. Had there been in God's heart the least lack of infinite mercy, had there been a single fibre of indifference to the misery of his creatures, Christ would never have been given to die for the guilt of men.

 

Cuckoo, cuckoo :crazy:

 

Talking snakes, trees of knowledge, angels, sons of gods born as men, dragons..........where are the hobbits in all this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cuckoo, cuckoo :crazy:

 

Talking snakes, trees of knowledge, angels, sons of gods born as men, dragons..........where are the hobbits in all this?

I agree Jun. I have typically felt that most people can be reasoned with. However I am beginning to feel that some things only deserve the ridicule they inspire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the problem?

 

There is a talking snake involved in this ridiculous myth, and you are asking what the problem is? Are you actually serious?

 

something's wrong with the world

 

Yes, and people who hold absurd and dangerous religious beliefs such as yours are a large part of the problem.

 

God the Son died to satisfy the Divine Justice

 

So, god sacrificed himself to himself to save us from himself, then? Yes, that makes sense. Glory!

 

God the Father is not the same Person, but the same Being as God the Son.

 

So the Holy Farter is a different Person, but the same Being as the Magic Sky Man? That makes absolutely NO sense. But then neither does the absurd trinity doctrine that has three gods somehow magically equaling one god. Divine Math:

 

skycalculator1.jpg

 

sin

 

Sin is a mythological concept taken from an ancient Book of Myths.

 

Satan

 

Satan, like god, is a myth.

 

a terrible offence against God

 

Please explain how it is possible to offend a mythological being. I'd like to give it a try! Glory!

 

believe that Jesus died for you, 'He is faithful and just to forgive your sins'.

 

So if I believe that Jesus sacrificed himself to the Sky Him in order to save us from himself, then he'll forgive me for the shit that I did that pissed him off, right?

 

it does remain a mystery.

 

The only mystery is how otherwise intelligent people can take such ridiculous religious beliefs seriously.

 

 

 

Cuckoo, cuckoo Wendycrazy.gif

 

Talking snakes, trees of knowledge, angels, sons of gods born as men, dragons..........where are the hobbits in all this?

 

I was hoping that a flatulent leprechaun might somehow be involved in all of this. That would be fun! Glory!

 

It's hard for me to think about Christian beliefs and not laugh my ass off until I realize that millions of people actually take these beliefs seriously. :twitch::eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For Nearly Normal people, claiming to be 3 Persons In One might get you your own movie. Or a trip to Bellevue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

God the Son died to satisfy the Divine Justice.

 

"Jesus," if he really did exist, died because he was captured, he wouldn't have had a say in it. He was crucified because they had had enough of him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, the Nicean Creed errors from the word of God on two points. On the Son of God being begotten, and baptism toward forgiveness of sins.

 

The bible is pretty clear on the significance of water baptism. Shall we look for ourselves?

 

First, the words of Jesus:

 

John 3:5

Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit.

 

Pretty succint, no? But what does he mean by that?

 

38Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call."

 

There's your "water and spirit". It couldn't be any more plain than that. This is the first sermon after Jesus' death and Peter (who had the keys, remember?) sets up the method of salvation for everyone. Water baptism is how one receives forgiveness and thereby is sanctified and a pure vessel for the receiving of the holy spirit.

 

The bible even goes on to further explain this miraculous salvation through water baptism.

 

Col 2:1In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, 12having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.13When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins

 

And, to those who like to parrot non biblical sentiments such as "baptism is an outward symbol of an inward grace", the bible has this to say....

 

1 Pet 3:18For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit, 19through whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison 20who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, 21and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22who has gone into heaven and is at God's right hand—with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him.

 

 

The bible says the the destruction of the entire world and the salvation of a few through the waters of the mighty flood were a mere symbol of the baptism that now saves you. Water baptism is no symbol, but an actual participation in the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, at which time you die to the sinful nature, and are connected to the salvific power of Christ's blood and death on the cross, forgiven of sins and imparted the Holy Spirit. That's when you're saved. That's when you become a part of the Kingdom of God (which by the way is the earthly church and not in the afterlife).

 

Any questions, christians?

 

Seems pretty clear to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, the Nicean Creed errors from the word of God on two points. On the Son of God being begotten, and baptism toward forgiveness of sins.

 

And other Christians defend it. The Nicean Creed is not the standard, the word of God is.

 

 

Paul_S, the fathers who formulated the Nicene Creed did not claim that the creed was above the word of God. They did put it out there as a statement of what the word of God teaches about some controversies in their day. You think you have greater insight into the Word than they did? You, who are separated from the apostolic age by almost seventeen more centuries? You, who are one person, against the bishops of the majority of Christendom of the fourth century? you wouldn't even have a Bible if the early church hadn't made a selection of what it took to be inspired books from among a lot of books floating around. You are puffed up in your own pride and understanding. your adherence to your own private judgment puts you in dangerous ground of heresy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
[*]A talking snake tempted the mother of all humanity and she tempted the father of all humanity and thus they sinned.

Bruce

I'd like to amplify this point and add two other conditions:

 

A. Adam and Eve were created as perfect beings, that is sinless. Since this is literally believed as fact by Christians, then how could a perfect person sin? Furthermore, if perfect beings can not sin, then are we in fact, discussing gods? And if we are not discussing something yaweh god-like, then how can one state that Eve's and Adam's temptation by satan/snake really considered to be a sin? Perfect beings choose perfectly, perfectly every single time. Therefore, being "tempted" by Satan would be a good choice because it was chosen by a perfect person.

 

B. Since its been established that A & E were created perfect, what would god gain by placing a tree of knowledge of good and evil and a tree of life into his garden? Ignoring for the moment that these two trees are unnecessary to perfect beings, what other purpose would they serve? Also, a perfect being would already have the necessary knowledge of good and evil preloaded into them, so again, the tree and tempetation is unnecessary. Much less the foil of satan/snake - the dust eater that he is. But perhaps, A & E weren't perfect. And if they were not created perfect, then I don't see why god is all so suprised, nor feels the need to allow someone to be killed to regain his alledged omnibenevolence. Also, if one does not have knowledge of good and evil, how is one to know that disobeying god is a sin? They do not have the necessary foundation to understand that disobedience is a problem, that is, it is a bad thing.

 

Any Christian with verbal gymnastics limber enough to explain this to me?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[*]A talking snake tempted the mother of all humanity and she tempted the father of all humanity and thus they sinned.

[*]All humans are thus tainted with the original sin, instigated by a talking snake.

[*]God fathered a son by a human woman, who is also the same god as his father.

.

 

Bruce

 

Where did the bible ever say it was a snake?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[*]A talking snake tempted the mother of all humanity and she tempted the father of all humanity and thus they sinned.

[*]All humans are thus tainted with the original sin, instigated by a talking snake.

[*]God fathered a son by a human woman, who is also the same god as his father.

.

 

Bruce

 

Where did the bible ever say it was a snake?

 

Ok, fine, it was a giant squid or a leviathan. It doesn't make the story any less ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.