Attention Christians: Doesn't It Bother You?

[Abiyoyo]

 

I don't know, but perhaps you best be on the lookout for bears.........your loving god may decide to strike you down.

 

I never have gotten this line of debate or thought. I mean, really?

 

If one takes that one verse, just as it is, stamps it as one of The Reasons^TM; then shouldn't you also take all the other verses just as they are?

 

You say potato, I say patato.

[Vixentrox]

No, the point is, you boneheads can't practice what you preach, and then when you are called on it, you say, "we don't have rules". WTF?

Is name calling a sin? Just curious. Didn't your loving god send some bears to kill children who were name calling?

 

I would think that if I had evil intentions for the outcome, then yes it was a sin.

Like those evil intentions of kids name calling? Good to know an appropriate punishment is death by mauling.

 

 

 

***thinking***

 

 

And then, in the year 2000AD many people began to advance, become smart, build things unlike any other time. Money was the height of civilization, in a form of currency. Rare metals were made into decorations for many people, also rare jewels were added to these decorations added tremndous value to them.

 

Many people searched high and low for these precious stones, especially one called the diamond. People wanted these diamonds so badly, and they were at such a high demand, that the suppliers were getting limited. You see, the money the companies acquired from the sales of these decorations was very substantial, and any losses would have greatly impacted their companies. This is also the same of the Great credit crisis that happened some years later in America, as the big companies kept trying to make more and more money.

 

These decorations became so in demand, and so limited that other resources were needed, in new regions, unprotected regions, uncivilized regions. The diamonds became popular in certain parts of Africa, and were much cheaper than through other companies.

 

This caused what was called, The Blood diamonds.

 

Some of these regimes and militias made little children become soldiers, shooting people on sight.

 

-------------------------------

Vix, children are not always so innocent, especially when they are ungoverned, unregulated, from primitive societies, unethical influences.

 

The story I just said is true actually, and children were as deadly as an adult with the right equipment.

 

Maybe those kids were armed with something?

 

Before you say ridiculous, first, think about it because IMO it would be just as ridiculous for a greater prophet to have struck down some kids for no apparent reason other than calling him a name.

Your evil god strikes down people for no good reason. Or he has his faithful butcher them. Read your bible.

[Abiyoyo]

 

Your evil god strikes down people for no good reason. Or he has his faithful butcher them. Read your bible.

 

Maybe they just did it because they 'thought' they were being righteous or something, then wrote about it. ?

[NotBlinded]

Everwhere End,absolutely everywhere.In the stars of the Andromeda galaxy. In Kathlene's house, in the bottom of the ocean.In the computer and keyboard I'm typing on. In me. In every molecule and subatomic particle that composes me. In every particle that composes Legion, or you or anyone or any living thing. My concept of divinity does seem to change a lot, but the basic concept I have is a god who is both transcendent and immanent. That is, ever present in all creation and simultaneously outside it. One that is not only Beyond. But Beyond BEYOND.

 

I don't know the true nature of "God", but I think it's safe to say "he" is not a cosmic bully who would need or want praise or worship or would torment those who dared not worship him.

 

Of course this means we, and I just don't mean those of us on this tiny planet, but any sort of life that exists in the cosmos is completely on it's own. A bit disheartening, but better than the idea of the Supreme Being being so insecure it has to be constantly reminded how great it is.

 

End, I don't have any real beef with you or any christian.What I have a beef with, is the idea of the divine being a tyrant.

Awesome...me too.

[Ouroboros]

Proselytizing? The question was addressed to Christians!

In our place.

 

It's not a place made to encourage and support Christians. So no one here went to a Christian place to convert Christians to Ex-Christians.

 

It's Christians who come here. And I admire those who do and maintain some form of sanity through all the pressure they get, like you or Kathlene. I admire that. But don't call it proselytizing that we're asking and stating opinion in the very place which was made for us to be allowed to ask and state opinions.

[chefranden]

 

 

Did you know that scholars must have thought that the context demanded condemned, because that is the way it is mostly translated here? And just for the record it does sound just as damning, for what do you suppose that judgment means here? Why do you keep trying to get the fear and trembling out of working out your salvation?

 

One thing I admire about fundies is their willingness to stick to the text and not nicen it up. In point of fact God, if real, is made out by the text to be an asshole. Fortunately for you there is no God so you can believe what ever nonsense you like and still get by, because non-entities don't generally give a shit about what you believe.

 

 

Which scholars? Around Constantine? John is documented to be written (in full length) around 300AD. I think the earliest other form of John is a few verses in chapter 18, which date 50-100AD.

 

So, there you have it fellow Ex-C'ers. An official possible completely altered book of the NT, John. All Textus Receptus. Which Chef, would mean, John was written either by late followers that adhered to the early church, or written by the early church itself.

 

Oh no Ralph, you may not borrow my axe. I have to make soup, and the brown pixie is yellow again. I suspect that Abiyoyo's string is broken again, either that or he's out walking the dog. Did you hear? The Robins are going to be in the World Series. Yes I know, I wouldn't have guessed that grass is green either, and this coffee tastes like kool aid -- you know like JJ served.

[Shyone]

You know what End? Fuck you. That's right. Fuck you.

 

Somehow I'm supposed to give you the freedom to be a Christian, but I'm not supposed to have my own expectations of them. I suppose I should ask you what I should expect from Christians.

 

Tell me End. What should I expect from Christians? What kind of behavior can I anticipate?

 

My best guess is he sees K's reversion as some sort of victory, like the lost sheep being brought back into the fold and now he is getting defensive because he views us as wolves.

Also because he may view Kathlene as a saved soul, and we who would corrupt her and lead her astray are not only stealing his "victory", but putting Kathlene's immortal soul in danger.

 

I thought the response was a little excessive given the fact that we take liberties with beliefs of all kinds here and critize them relentlessly - but end wants us to tread gently around Kathlene.

[Shyone]

 

Your evil god strikes down people for no good reason. Or he has his faithful butcher them. Read your bible.

 

Maybe they just did it because they 'thought' they were being righteous or something, then wrote about it. ?

You know, that was exactly my thought.

 

Just for a moment, consider the bible written by men. When men write history, they make themselves out to be the good guys. They base their goodness, badness, and their ideas of god's behavior on surrounding cultures whose gods are tyrants and cruel.

 

So they thought they were being righteous. But they were just being men justifying what they had done using God as their means of justification. Moses acted alone. Funny how he always could talk to God whenever he wanted to, and God always ordered what he had no qualms about doing.

 

The implications are staggering, but consistent with the "barbarous acts of God" which are so - human.

 

Imagine that you are the leader of these ancient people and think how to motivate your people. "God said" was powerful stuff. Moses was damn near omnipotent.

 

Once it has been considered, then what's left? Maybe the prophets were talking to God? Or maybe it's all just men writing What Would Yahweh Do, each with a particular idea of God - god the merciful, god the jealous, god the vengeful, god the conquerer. And Jesus saw this too, and tried to fix it. Eye for an eye? How about turn the other cheek? Stone the adulteress? Are we all so perfect that we can judge her? Picking up sticks on the Sabbath? Give me a fucking break!

[Shyone]

 

I don't know, but perhaps you best be on the lookout for bears.........your loving god may decide to strike you down.

 

I never have gotten this line of debate or thought. I mean, really?

 

If one takes that one verse, just as it is, stamps it as one of The Reasons^TM; then shouldn't you also take all the other verses just as they are?

 

You say potato, I say patato.

But potato is correct. Patato and potatoe are both wrong.

[Jedah]

I have a question for the Christians in this thread who are seriously trying to defend the doctrine of hell. This is actually the same question I ask any christian if I am talking to them in a real life casual debate regarding religion. Personally I feel it outlines the core problem behind why Hell can never be Justified.

 

First of all, does the bible not support the Golden rule? "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." - Of course it does. It's the first thing taught to kids in sunday school.

 

Now, with the golden rule in mind lets examine a hypothetical scenario.

 

===================================================================

 

Lets say for some horrible unknown reason you were to die today. The second you brain ceases functioning you find yourself awakening to the most amazing feeling you have ever had as you ascend into the sky. You arrive at the pearly gates, more beautiful then you ever imagined. With this fantastic view you begin to feel the peace you have searched for your entire life. At long last, you will get to be with your heavenly Father. No more waiting and wondering, you think to yourself that everything from now on will be perfect. The existence you felt on earth feels like hell in comparison. You couldn't be happier. As you step through the Golden Gates, you hear a sudden booming voice:

 

"STOP !!! WHO ARE YOU !!! INFIDEL !!!"

 

You are instantly transported to the throne of God...but something seems strange. It's not a bearded man in a long and glorious white coat and there are no Angels in sight. Instead you look into the face of a large entity that seems to resemble what you have seen before on Totem poles. The voice continues "WHY DID YOU NOT ACCEPT ME WHEN I GAVE YOU THE GREAT AFRICAN TIKI PIKI DREAM!!!". You think for a moment and for the life of you you cannot recall any such dream. When your respond with this and tell him you don't remember the God becomes enraged. You try to plead with him and ask where Jesus is, and tell him how you lived your whole life serving his holy ways. But this God will listen to no such reasoning. "YE FOOL. JESUS IS OF THE GREAT EVIL TO DECIEVE YOU! NOW, TO THE ETERNAL CHAMBERS OF TORMENT WITH YOU!!!".

 

That's it. You instantly find yourself falling into a pit of flames. All that belief in Christianity got you what? Eternal damnation. The question is this: As you fall into your destiny, how would you feel? Do you think this situation is purely justified? Did your "choice" of religion in life truly warrant what is about to happen to you? I'll get straight to the point. If you truly and honestly believe that an omnibenevolent God is compatible with eternal punishment for non belief, not only should you not have any negative feelings in this scenario...you should feel happy. You should be glad that you are receiving your ethically pure and just punishment. You should be glad you are getting what you deserve for rejecting the Tiki Piki dream. If you think any other way, any justification you come up with for the doctrine of hell being compatible with omnibenevolence is inherently hypocritical, and therefore fails to follow the golden rule. Why? Because this is exactly what you believe. You believe others deserve to go to hell for picking the wrong religion (IE: Not Yours) , so in the hypothetical situation that your religion turns out to be false should you not be the one to burn? If you cannot honestly and truly accept this, then any reason you use to explain how hell sits well with justice is automatically a double standard regardless of anything else you say.

 

================================================================================

 

I have had a few christians try to say they would be perfectly fine with going to hell in that scenario. None of them could do it with a straight face, and personally I don't think it is possible to do so. You don't think you deserve to be tortured for all eternity for believing that the sky is blue now do you? Then why on earth should you be punished for any other belief? Belief is our understanding of reality based on how we experience it, not a choice. Punishing someone for believing in the "wrong God" is no different than punishing someone for the color of their skin.

 

 

 

Furthermore, all attempts to rationalize or justify hell are extremely poor. I or anyone else with a basic level of intellectual honesty could rip the arguments to shreds.

"People choose to not believe, so hell is perfectly justified" -> Circular argument. Thats like saying if a law existed where everyone who didn't breath correctly be put to death, the punishment of being put to death is perfectly justified because they chose to breath funny. You are assuming the law is justified because it is the law. On the stupid scale, I'd say that registers a full 10/10.

"He is God so he can do anything" -> Cartoon Universe Argument / straw-grasping. Replace "God" with *Insert any hypothetical Absolute being* and hell with *Insert any evil you can think of here* and you've got yourself a formula for "proving" that a baby torturing factory is morally justified.

 

"Hell isn't eternal torment, it's just destruction of the soul!" -> Sugarcoating / Red herring . The point of the problem still stands that people are being punished for something which deserves no punishment. Lessening the punishment through a more liberal interpretation fails to address that point and is a bad attempt to change the argument from how hell is just to what hell is. You can put sugar and honey on a turd, but it's still a turd and you can bet your ass that it will still taste like shit.

 

And the list just goes on and on with each sad attempt to justify the unjustifiable more ridiculous and ridden with fallacies than the last.

 

 

Christians, here is the unpleasant truth: Hell is an idea made by man to abuse fear in order to scare people into following Dogma. No being of pure good would ever create a universe with such an insanely unfair rule and I would be inclined to say that a part of you damn well already knows that. Stop kidding yourselves. Stop being a hypocrite who holds other religions to a standard you would never accept if you were in their shoes. Christianity as it exists today is a false religion. Burn in your own hell if you love it so much.

[Major Tom]

... Kathlene is not "searching". She has expressed a definite position that she is now an xian. Many of us are no longer searching for God. We are done -- and can I get an AMEN to that from my fellow heathens!

 

Amen, from a fellow heathen, Deva. ... the kind of heathen who might be described as Buddhist/Pantheist/Christian, a Pantheist who values Truth and the Golden Rule.

 

According to Sam Harris, "One of the greatest challenges facing civilization in the twenty-first century is for human beings to learn to speak about their deepest personal concerns—about ethics, spiritual experience, and the inevitability of human suffering—in ways that are not flagrantly irrational."

 

Religion is at many levels just a business, so let's talk about it in those terms without anybody getting offended. As some of you know I have some background in engineering, manufacturing and R & D. I am going to be frank now, This "Sin Problem" we are discussing in the OP, is really just another bonehead snafu in the Creator's R & D department (research and development). It all boils down to a case of one very over-zealous mega-bi-polar Inventor/Creator intent upon trashing his most ambitious creation in what amounts to a fit of rage, and as a result of what? It is as a result of a very preventable blunder, preventable on His own part (no disrespect intended). It is almost amusing. Just think of it... If only the thouhjt had occurred to Him to test a prototype of the "Adam and Eve bi-peds" to see if the untested, implausible idea of free will , (... DAH! )...would actually work before going into full production. Just think of the fuel costs and the natural resources that could have been saved from those Damnation Fires, ...to say nothing of the hundreds of billions of precious heathen souls, more or less, that Jesus died uselessly for, ... and all for what reason exactly? Piss poor planning, poor specs, no development of a successful prototype before going to full production, no quality controls at any yardstick in any process, from the moment of Creation to the final curtain of Hell-fire. And finally what most forcefully draws our attention to the utter disdain by Some in High Places for prudent and sound engineering principles, it is obvious that there was no contingency planning for any possibility that specifications of "perfection" in humanity might not be achieved.

 

The shear enormity of the waste that has resulted simply boggles the mind. It just makes you wonder what God was thinking about at the time? My guess is The Omniscient One's distraction was caused due to the mixed blessing of foreknowledge of some damnable facts unfolding in the future such as of the ENRON scandal; perhaps the God was overly concerned with the inevitable "bottleneck" that would be caused at the gates of Hell, due to the inundation there of ENRON Executives and crony Capital Hill legislators who would vote to bail them out). The irony of course is that the ENRON scandal is but a "jot and a tittle" in comparison to this "Adam/Eve Prototype Debacle".

 

LESSONS LEARNED:

 

Thinking as a Sin

This concept is outdated. Certainly it is easy to play the blame game here, but that is counterproductive to the purpose of this post. In a sense we all are to blame, but not as a result of "original sin", mind you, as some would say but because each of us was foolish enough to believe that we had good reason to think, and to actually use the minds that were assigned to us at birth. We must all remember never to make that same mistake again, should it turn out that we are reincarnated once again into this world. (Wait, I think in that case it would be okay (to think) because "reincarnation" will have trumped the "damnation for thinking" idea).

 

With no offense intended toward Christians, it is must be said that it is no doubt evident to all observers that performance at the highest levels of Heavenly leadership have proved to be less than exemplary, and most particularly as it relates to this latest brainchild, the Human Race. Recommendation is made, therefore, that future facets in the planning, R & D, pre-production, production, quality control, and post production waste management be appropriately delegated to the angels (if they exist) to allow for greater insight and greater oversight of all Heavenly activities.

 

Recommend that the "Lessons Learned" as presented herein regarding alleged obvious inept mistakes made un-named Dieties in the creation process on Earth, be xopied and forwarded to all other Dieties (if they exist), and to all other Universes (if they exist), where gods may be lording it over any other life forms (if they too exist).

--

For Ex-Christian.Net Admin: If at any time in future you should get wind of an actual impending Second Coming of Christ, kindly do not hesitate to delete this post. Thank you. - Major Tom

[Dagan]

The shear enormity of the waste that has resulted simply boggles the mind. It just makes you wonder what God was thinking about at the time?

 

Some ancient cultures (predating the Hebrews) believed the world was created in an act of divine masturbation

 

What WAS he thinking about?

[Vixentrox]

The shear enormity of the waste that has resulted simply boggles the mind. It just makes you wonder what God was thinking about at the time?

 

Some ancient cultures (predating the Hebrews) believed the world was created in an act of divine masturbation

 

What WAS he thinking about?

Raping virgins...?

[Kathlene]

Holy Moly guys!!!!!!!

 

I think I have set off a war within ex-c...my deep apologies. I wrote that spiel before I went to bed last night, and wondered how many replies it would get. I went to work today, so I have had no time at all to check it out til now.

 

Wow.

 

First off I will say that there have been lots of good points raised that I have been chewing over all last night. There were a few replies in it before I went to bed.

Secondly, the thread seem to go all over the place in the responses and replies.

 

Legion buddy...I told you in the shout that I was back with God, and jokingly asked you if you wanted me to pass on anything to him. Sorry, miscommunication there. I am sorry you are disappointed in me. I can handle any thoughts and responses that are thrown at me in here. Im a big girl..I mean that literally too, lol. I know this is the Lions Den and its each to their own in here. I was not proselytizing in here. I was trying to understand Tabs initial invitation to us christians to answer his question.

 

 

The responses have been varied indeed. Thankyou End and Abi for coming in on white horses to pitch in too. I hope what I wrote was indeed fully biblical and the truth. I was going by what I hoped was right theology.

 

Thankyou ex-cers for being so graceful and understanding and not ripping me to shreds too much.

 

 

Im actually not going to put in a reply to respond to the posts yet. I am so exhausted from work that I am unable. I will however spend tonight pondering the replies. Thankyou all.

 

Just a side note. I am happy with the decision I made. That is not to say though, that I have come back in here to evangelise or preach whatever to you guys. I understand all the pain that Christianity has caused you, and I certainly dont want to add to that pain. I enjoy all the friendships I have made in here, and hope to continue with them.

[Legion]

Legion buddy...I told you in the shout that I was back with God...

I either didn't see it, or saw it and misunderstood.

 

I am sorry you are disappointed in me.

I hope you understand Kathlene. Maybe for you Christianity is like a brace for your leg, helping you to stand. But I mainly see an awkward and cumbersome device which is more hassle than benefit. I'm not disappointed that you may need the reinforcement. Everyone has weakness. Rather, the means you have chosen to compensate for it is what disappoints me.

 

I tell you. Sometimes it's a very difficult thing to disapprove of a belief yet refrain from judging the believer. However once more, I will attempt this for you Kathlene.

[Abiyoyo]

 

 

Most people feel a natural repulsion to killing or hurting someone else.

 

In this day and age they do possibly have a repulsion. But that isn't exactly solidified evidence that God has something inside of us, pre-built that repulses people from harmful things. We have thousands of years worth of history that says people haven't always been repulsive of harmful things. Even by today's standards, people are still amused and entertained by harmful activities, we just watch it on movies with actors that pretend because our society, especially in America, is more geared toward civil acts.

 

History shows more evidence that humans have had the propulsion to harm, kill, conquer than to be naturally repulsed by it. What about animals? We eat all kinds of animals, from slaughter houses, cleaned, cut, and put in a grocery store all nice and neat. But, someone killed that animal.

 

We are intelligent, civilized, animals in my opinion.

 

But, another question. You mentioned kid and candy. What is the candy in your scenario?

 

I have been trying to think of what the candy would be in your scenario. Adultery, fornication, sexual desires, criminal acts, etc?

 

In another thread you asked me if I was a criminal because of my response, so I to ask you if your candy is things that you possibly thought about, as you have said you don't think about those things or want to do, without God.

 

If that is still true, then there is no candy bowl at least for you, which would mean in essence, there is no candy bowl example to be defined at all because it would have to include everyone.

[Major Tom]

Holy Moly guys!!!!!!!

 

I think I have set off a war within ex-c...my deep apologies. I wrote that spiel before I went to bed last night, and wondered how many replies it would get. I went to work today, so I have had no time at all to check it out til now.

 

Wow.

 

First off I will say that there have been lots of good points raised that I have been chewing over all last night. There were a few replies in it before I went to bed.

Secondly, the thread seem to go all over the place ...

 

Just a side note. I am happy with the decision I made. That is not to say though, that I have come back in here to evangelise or preach whatever to you guys. I understand all the pain that Christianity has caused you, and I certainly dont want to add to that pain. I enjoy all the friendships I have made in here, and hope to continue with them.

 

Kathlene, hope you hang in there as you follow your path to truth. As it happens, my own path took a turn "off road" several months ago, Here is part of the OP which was titled, "I Shall Have To Say Goodbye My Friends"....

 

"I Shall Have To Say Goodbye My Friends. I have become a Buddhist/Christian... I will not preach, but you deserve an explanation. In a nutshell. I am convinced there is good and evil in the world, personified. I cannot explain my observations and memories adequately with Newtonian and Einsteins' science. After this post, and after viewing any immediate comments I shall be out of here. But first, scientific method dictates that we each follow our evidence and here is one of mine. I sent an email to a friend that went like this... (etc.)"

 

I took a lot of heat for that decision and OP. You might enjoy some of the incensed and simpathetic comments in that thread. http://www.ex-christ...bye-my-friends/ Let reason and your intuition be your guide.

[bdp]

 

Yeah, it's called grace.

 

 

 

god Xtian smarminess is nauseating.

[bdp]

 

 

Oh gheeze, there's an intelligent remark. Exactly what I am describing. "We are enlightened and claim this morality without God, yet when pushed.....I am not going to stifle my opinion for their happiness". And it's not forced dumbass....it's a choice for her out of love.

 

Proselytizing? The question was addressed to Christians!

 

end, you're an asshole.

[mwc]

Well my viewpoint I guess is..does God want to control us as robots or come to Him because we want to?

If God wanted us to all go to heaven cause he wants all His children there, then sure He could do that if He wanted to. Would that be because each and every one of you chose to go there? Would you want to be forced to love someone and worship him, or do it because you actually do love God? Or because by default we are like robots and get to be in His presence regardless.?

So did what did "god" think about A&E?

 

Imagine a garden minus that tree of knowledge. It's pretty easy to imagine I think. So what have you got? Do you have a garden of robots? A place where "god" physically came down to be among things he sort of despised because they "lacked" a certain something? That "something" being? Well, the ability to go against him and take from a forbidden tree it would seem. Do you think he would actually not care for A&E because they couldn't do such a thing? Or is it reasonable to think that having no such ability they, as a group, would have been perfectly content together? The text seems to indicate that "god" was pleased walking among them. Free will, minus the tree of knowledge, was be exorcise fully and completely. They could do what they wanted, when they wanted and how they wanted. There was nothing lacking. They were not "robots" in any sense of the word. If you can locate in Genesis how the tree of knowledge freed A&E from being "forced" to "worship" and/or "love" their "god" then I would like to see it. But I know, for a fact, you will not find it. The tree of knowledge had no bearing on this point. In fact, A&E did not worship their "god" at all. He never demands it of them. They are simply together at various times within the garden. I'd have to double check but I don't even know if "love" is mentioned. The best I can think of is the concept of "communing," as if with nature, is portrayed.

 

The tree of knowledge does not somehow turn A&E from robots into beings able to think and use free will. They could do so with or without that tree.

 

So two things immediately spring to mind here.

1. This is a huge debatable topic in here. Our sin. If you dont believe in sin, then you dont believe in God, then you dont believe or choose to want to be with him.God is holy and cannot be in the presence of sin. If you have sin in your heart and you are not washed clean by the forgiveness of those sins and covered by the sacrifice of Jesus your sin is still there in your heart.(okay...yes I can hear the shrieking and indignation coming out in howls and yelps here.)

I don't believe in sin against a "god." I can "sin" against another person though I tend to use other words to describe such a thing. I have to do "wrongs" against things which exist or that are animate (I can't really "wrong" a table...oddly enough I can "right" one).

 

2.So now if you want that do not go to jail free ticket, I guess you have to come to grips that a) we were not created as robots. God wants us to freely love him and worship him.(Now I hear the ultimatum, worship me or die howls.)

People this is not an ultimatum worship me or die scenario. This is a come to me and live, I love you, I want to be with you, see I set up a system where your sins are washed away, your hearts can be clean in my presence type thing.

 

If you decide...now read this...YOU decide that loving God or worshipping him is not your cup of tea, or you dont have enough evidence, or whatever it is that you cannot believe in him, God says ok then, and it breaks his heart. He will not violate his created beings and force you into heaven to be with him. He wants YOU to choose Him. If you dont choose him, he isnt saying well bugger off then. He is just saying, thats really sad, however when you die there will be a place that you go to and it is a place where I cannot be because it is a place of sin and darkness. I am life and I need to be around people who have my life in them. Oh I hear it again now..(but wait! why should I spend all eternity in a place just becasue of a few small misshaps??).

Okay. So I have to accept your premise that I "sin," or commit "wrongs," against your imaginary "god?" This is really the step that *HAS* to take place now doesn't it? It's no longer about anything really but about accepting *this* very premise. I *must*, without question, accept that *I* commit acts of wrong against your "god" who I must also now concede is *my* "god" as well. Correct? This is *key* to what you are saying. Since I cannot do any wrongs nor can your "god" have any authority over me otherwise. If I'm not under this "god's" jurisdiction I'm free to do whatever I like even if this being exists. And on and on through many permutations.

 

So, for this, I will concede (not in real life...this is no conversion). I have now admitted that I can somehow "sin" against your/my "god" and it has the ability and authority to do something about it. So how are "sins" determined? I am a "sinner" after all. There must be some very clear cut means of identifying "sin" so that I can simply not do it. Because that is what rules are for.

 

Well God like I said before is HOLY. He created us, we sin. We are separated from him because we are NOT robots. We have a mind and free will. We can choose to be with God or we can choose to not be with God. It is OUR choice. He will not force you. So now we are back to the circular argument of sin yet again.

 

I think recognising our sin is a beautiful thing. Firstly it does indeed show that we are human and we have weaknessess and frailties. Now I hear you ask, if God created us, why is sin in the world in the first place? Why arent we all perfect? Well, like before, we are not created to be robots and to be pure perfect human beings. We were created with a heart, body and soul. For one reason or another, sin is in our nature. So why you ask then is it our fault that we should be separated from God because of something He created? Well when you have a child you want them to love you because they want to. God gave us free will and in doing so took the risk that we would turn our backs on him and live in a different way. That is the risk of love. In love God redeemed the world, and it is only by love that sin and darkness is conquered. Love is the answer.

Sin is a circular argument? This will make things difficult. But I think we'll make it through...

 

Okay. For "one reason or another, sin is in our nature." Got it. So "god" wants us to be unnatural. To enter an unnatural state is the only way for us to be with "god." This is...reasonable? Fish living and breathing in water might be, to "god," a "sin" but to have it come onto land in order to be with this "god" a good thing? Certainly you want to say something different. You don't want to tell me that going against our very nature is the only way to not "sin" in the eyes of this "god." Even the most...simple...human understands that you don't force animals to go against their nature. That they are what they are. You accept them that way. You learn to deal with them that way. You come down to their level. They won't come up to yours. They are inferior to humans when it comes to intellect. They do not "sin" against us. They act according to their nature. It is us that commits "sin" against them if we cannot recognize this simple concept. Are you saying that "god" is truly "sinning" against us since it commands us to go against our very nature? Surely you must be mistaken.

 

How so? Sacrifice. Gods sacrifice to us, and our sacrifice to Him. What is our sacrifice? To die to our sins and ego and accept that we live the wrong way, and always probably will and we need a redeemer. God is Holy and for whatever reason he has stated that to be in His presence we cannot have that sinful nature in us. It needs to be atoned for. Our role is to say sorry and ask to be forgiven. Thats a huge ask of anyone. In return we get Gods righteousness. No that does not mean that we will never sin again.

"Die to our sins and ego?" "We live the wrong way?" "Whatever reason?" "Sinful nature?"

 

Why do you want me to hate myself because "god" doesn't like me for being who I am? Why do you want me to alter my very nature to be with a "god" that can't stand to look at me as I am right now? Has this "god" asked the fish to change? Has he asked birds to change? Has he asked the cats, or the dogs or even the much hated pigs? Am I the only thing in all of creation that he hates so much that he cannot look upon and must change my very core nature to even consider being with him? He cannot overlook my flaws. I must be cast aside if I cannot become what I am not.

 

It means that we are open and willing to have God work in our lives for our good to change us and shape us. To give us growth as a human being, in healing in touching our lives, and for us in return to touch other people's lives in love. That walk is a long arduous walk. It can often be filled with frustration, pain, suffering. It also yields patience, wisdom, growth, maturity. It can also be a walk of deep peace and rest. I do know however that even I and many others in here didnt always experience that. I walked away from God initially through anger and rebellion because my life wasnt going the way I thought it SHOULD. Now I have learnt that Gods ways are so much higher than my own, even when I cant always see it. There comes the blind trust in those times of growing.

Until your "god" looks down from on high and sees his own face reflected back from my own he will continue to reject me and all like me. That is not love. That is narcissism. He is in love with himself. I do not reject your "god" but rather your "god" rejects me. I will continue to remain an individual. I keep my own face. I will keep my own nature. If this displeases your "god" then so be it. Death of our very nature, our very thing that makes us human, to be replaced with a shallow reflection on the hopes of being accepted is too high of a price to pay. Sacrifice? Suicide.

 

mwc

[Ouroboros]

In this day and age they do possibly have a repulsion. But that isn't exactly solidified evidence that God has something inside of us, pre-built that repulses people from harmful things. We have thousands of years worth of history that says people haven't always been repulsive of harmful things. Even by today's standards, people are still amused and entertained by harmful activities, we just watch it on movies with actors that pretend because our society, especially in America, is more geared toward civil acts.

 

History shows more evidence that humans have had the propulsion to harm, kill, conquer than to be naturally repulsed by it. What about animals? We eat all kinds of animals, from slaughter houses, cleaned, cut, and put in a grocery store all nice and neat. But, someone killed that animal.

So you're saying that the repulsion has evolved?

 

We are intelligent, civilized, animals in my opinion.

Agree.

 

But, another question. You mentioned kid and candy. What is the candy in your scenario?

 

I have been trying to think of what the candy would be in your scenario. Adultery, fornication, sexual desires, criminal acts, etc?

No, the analogy is only focusing on the question of choice. If you give a kid a choice, but you demand they make on specific choice, what would you call it? Would you consider yourself being a good person or giving the kid a free choice when you demand him or her to make only one specific? It could be candy, or choice of college, that part doesn't really matter.

 

In another thread you asked me if I was a criminal because of my response, so I to ask you if your candy is things that you possibly thought about, as you have said you don't think about those things or want to do, without God.

The question was about choice, and the freedom of choosing. And the second part is, if you don't give the kid a very clear and precise command, then is the kid guilty of betrayal if he or she happens to pick the wrong one?

 

We could make it more formalized, if you want to:

 

A gives B a choice between x and z.

A secretly has a rule that B cannot choose x.

B makes a choice.

Was A fair?

 

If that is still true, then there is no candy bowl at least for you, which would mean in essence, there is no candy bowl example to be defined at all because it would have to include everyone.

The kid represents a human, anyone.

The candy represents the choice of believing in Jesus or not, or go to Heaven or Hell.

Could a Hindu in year 500 BCE make the right choice?