Did Jesus Sin?

[Amanda]

Hey you all, I'm curious about having this day of not working. I've been thinking about it... and if we had almost every single business closed on one day of the week, ANY day, except for maybe a few drug stores, gas stations, hotels, hospitals... what implications would that have on families and communities? Do you think it would cause families and communities to become more positively influence and more tightly woven together? I'm just curious...

[thunderbolt]

except for maybe a few drug stores, gas stations, hotels, hospitals...

This is the first problem. We will have endless FIGHTS about what the exceptions should be. We would have to discriminate against one type of business in favor of another. So, no, I don't think so.

 

We become tightly woven families and communities, because we make that choice, not because stores are open or closed.

 

To me it would be just another form of legalism, and the reason this has been a debate ever since the rule first showed up.

 

Just my 0.02 worth.

[Lycorth]

Human families have had no problem being tight-knit and naturally loving in pre-xian times where there was no such thing as a Sunday off. Humans are naturally family-loving creatures who love and cherish their kin and closest relatives, and except for naturally dysfunctional families, humans possess all the capability to be close and family-oriented without the slightest mention of Jesus.

 

After all, it is the Xian Babble which teaches the superiority of Jesus to everything, family included. One must go as far as to be prepared to hate one's own family for the sake of Jesus. And that surely includes castigating family members who do not go to church on Sunday, thereby creating more family problems. If anything, Xianity (as usual) causes the problems it pretends to solve.

 

We don't need Xianity to love each other.

[SkepticOfBible]

Hey Sub_zero

 

I forgot to mention that even Jesus knew that he and his disciples were commiting a sin. If there was any exception to the sabbath law (like the ones you claim they exist), he would have quoted them right there and then, and ended the matter.

 

However he did no such thing, instead he starts mentioning about 2 sins in the bible where the sinners were not punsihed

 

Matt 12

3But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him;

4How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?

5Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?

 

Pretty much he saying “well, those guys broke the law and got off, so therefore my disciples should not be punished too for humanitarian reasons”. In other words he was talking about situational ethics.

 

Till this date, a lot of good christians are still debating whether he sinned on the sabbath or not.(eg if you see in that messianic group). It's been 2000 years, and the holy spirit has failed to inform it's believers about the TRUTH.

 

Look forward to your reply.

 

PS:Where is the eg in the bible about the priest profaning the sabbath.

[Amanda]

Human families have had no problem being tight-knit and naturally loving in pre-xian times where there was no such thing as a Sunday off. Humans are naturally family-loving creatures who love and cherish their kin and closest relatives, and except for naturally dysfunctional families, humans possess all the capability to be close and family-oriented without the slightest mention of Jesus.

 

After all, it is the Xian Babble which teaches the superiority of Jesus to everything, family included. One must go as far as to be prepared to hate one's own family for the sake of Jesus. And that surely includes castigating family members who do not go to church on Sunday, thereby creating more family problems. If anything, Xianity (as usual) causes the problems it pretends to solve.

 

We don't need Xianity to love each other.

Wolfheart, I apologize... I didn't mean for this to have ANYTHING to do with Jesus. Of course people don't need to even mention Jesus to have a loving family! The day off could be Wednesday for all I care! I'm just saying that I think if we had one day where most things where closed, except the essentials, then it might promote a closer knit family and community. There seems to me, to be a correlation between the end of having an explicit day off for everyone and the fall of the family/community.

 

Gosh, I hope you guys don't think just because the Bible mentioned such an idea, it is automatically wrong... that would be a fundy in reverse.

[SkepticOfBible]

Gosh, I hope you guys don't think just because the Bible mentioned such an idea, it is automatically wrong... that would be a fundy in reverse.

 

Nope, and whoever takes that stance, is a idiot and closeminded. All religious books in the world have some good advice them. Have you ever read the Bhagwad Gita?

 

Everybody needs a break from work, but I think it is stupid to punish someone if he takes a a break on Wednesday, and there is no doubt in my mind a lot of people had lost their lives over this weird rule.

[Lycorth]

Wolfheart, I apologize... I didn't mean for this to have ANYTHING to do with Jesus. Of course people don't need to even mention Jesus to have a loving family! The day off could be Wednesday for all I care! I'm just saying that I think if we had one day where most things where closed, except the essentials, then it might promote a closer knit family and community. There seems to me, to be a correlation between the end of having an explicit day off for everyone and the fall of the family/community.

 

Gosh, I hope you guys don't think just because the Bible mentioned such an idea, it is automatically wrong... that would be a fundy in reverse.

 

No need to apologize, Amanda. Perhaps I should've been a hair clearer in my post; it was directed more at the notion of Xian-style love and the need for Jesus (and to any fundies who may be reading), not to you, though it was to your remark I responded. I absolve you anyway, my child.

 

Heh, it would be a fundy in reverse. There are good and bad things to be found in the Holah Babble, just that most of the book is, well, babble. It's just that the bad outweighs the good and when one reads the Scripchahs the bad is what sticks out most. But it's not without it's good bits, too.

[SkepticOfBible]

The only exception of any type of work was to help someone who was dying, or someone giving birth.

 

What verse would that be?

[Guest sub_zer0]

It is sin to pick up sticks but it's allright to pluck corn. I see

 

In Gastrich vs Barker debate, Dan Barker had raised a point about how cruel it was to kill a man for picking up sticks for the firewood, who was probably doing to it to feed his family. Do you what Jason's response was - "He could have gone hungry for a day for the lord". I wished Dan had asked him "So why couldn't the disciples do the same?"

 

The point is this about the passage in Matthew. They did not disobey the law because they were not working when they were picking up the wheat. They were hungry, completely within the Law, Det. 22.

 

Show me where does it CLEARLY says that you are allowed to pluck grains ON THE SABBATH?Where is the exception to the sabbath law given in the OT?

 

The verse in exodus clearly prohibits to work in the field on the sabbath whether with a sickle or with your hands. The prohibition of work on the sabbath law did not say picking up stick was work, yet a man was killed for the same reason.

 

Look at Deuteronomy. They were not working because they did not pick up the "sicle". They were hungry.

 

In other words you are telling me that you don't obey it? Funny heh

 

Or do you want to imply that jesus is observing the sabbath for in heaven?

 

Fundies claim that laws about sexuality are still effective, yet the same laws about the sabbath are not. They claim that 10 commandments are the perfect laws, but they keep violating the one of the them, because they want to observe the pagan origin of the sabbath.

 

There is nothing in the OT which says that during the New Convenant that a faith in a human sacrfice/messiah would exempt you from following the law.

 

SHOW ME VERSES FROM THE OT WHICH SAYS THAT LAWS WOULD NOT NEED TO BE FOLLOWED UNDER THE NC.

 

Even in those verses that Jesus said about he fulfilling it, has heaven and earth have passed? Has all the things have been fulfilled?

 

Therefore the laws are still binding.

 

So once again you are demonstrating your conflict with what you want to do and what god wants you to do?

 

If the laws are everlasting, that means they are still binding.

 

You are all over the place in this last post. Let me just take what you said here:

 

"SHOW ME VERSES FROM THE OT WHICH SAYS THAT LAWS WOULD NOT NEED TO BE FOLLOWED UNDER THE NC."

 

You are forgetting the point and purpose of the Law. It was to reveal the sin we all have. It was not for man to abide by forever. It was given to them for the time that they lived -- Israel was to be the beacon of the world. Now it is Jesus Christ for the "Jew first but also the Greek". Of course the Law will be observed for eternity, the Law is Christ, because Christ fulfilled the Law.

 

You cannot pin me down to just OT verses, because we are not dealing with a books theme that is based on the OT law specifically. The Bible's center point is Christ and all things should be looked at through Him. With that in mind, there is no need to show you verses that say the OT laws would not need to be followed because of Christ. What I need to show you is how Christ, fulfilled those laws, thus becoming, in essence, the ultimate fulfiller of the law and the New law or Covenant.

 

I have done that with the "Sabbath" attempt made by you and how, really it didn't even involve Christ, but His disciples. And it wasn't a breach of the Law to begin with because you are allowed to pick for food if you pass by somebody's field on the Sabbath, you just can't pick up a sicle and start working.

 

Any other ways that Christ didn't fulfill the law?

[Japedo]

The only exception of any type of work was to help someone who was dying, or someone giving birth.

 

What verse would that be?

 

I was taught it when I was taking classes, Jewish law is hardly ever "one verse" i'll give you a link you can read and study it for yourself.

 

Chapter 24 - ANIMALS, CHILDREN, AND THE SICK ON THE SABBATH

 

It's a wonderful resource to have on file for talking about Jewish Laws.

[Guest sub_zer0]

Hey Sub_zero

 

I forgot to mention that even Jesus knew that he and his disciples were commiting a sin. If there was any exception to the sabbath law (like the ones you claim they exist), he would have quoted them right there and then, and ended the matter.

 

However he did no such thing, instead he starts mentioning about 2 sins in the bible where the sinners were not punsihed

 

Matt 12

3But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him;

4How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?

5Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?

 

Pretty much he saying “well, those guys broke the law and got off, so therefore my disciples should not be punished too for humanitarian reasons”. In other words he was talking about situational ethics.

 

Till this date, a lot of good christians are still debating whether he sinned on the sabbath or not.(eg if you see in that messianic group). It's been 2000 years, and the holy spirit has failed to inform it's believers about the TRUTH.

 

Look forward to your reply.

 

PS:Where is the eg in the bible about the priest profaning the sabbath.

 

The truth is staring you right in front of the face. I am telling you the truth!

 

But on with my reply.

 

Jesus actually did quote the Old Testament. Which is exactly what He was doing with the quote you have there in Matthew 12:1-9. The passage of the Old Testament He was referring to is I Samuel 21:1-6. The whole underlying point is that the case of necessity the ceremonial law might be overruled. Jesus is using the illustration of David eating the "showbread."

 

Jesus also states the necessities of temple worship permitted the priests to "profane the sabbath," there was all the more reason that Christ's disciples should be overlooked. Jesus solidifies the point with this statement, 7"But if you had known what this means, 'I DESIRE COMPASSION, AND NOT A SACRIFICE,' you would not have condemned the innocent." Jesus was getting across the point that ethics is more important than ritual and the passage clearly asserts that Jesus had the right to interpret the Mosaic ordinances in light of their spiritual intention, rather than their literal application.

[Japedo]

It is sin to pick up sticks but it's allright to pluck corn. I see

 

 

 

The point is this about the passage in Matthew. They did not disobey the law because they were not working when they were picking up the wheat. They were hungry, completely within the Law, Det. 22.

 

it's considered work to harvest or pick food on the Sabbath.

 

I'll list the 39 Points for ya. Which can also be found on Torah.org I'll underline those which Christ broke.

 

There are 39 categories of forbidden work

 

"Plowing": digging in or improving the ground.

"Sowing": promoting the growth of plants.

"Reaping": detaching something from its place of growth. Making any use of a growing plant or live animal is rabbinically forbidden since it may lead to "reaping".

"Making sheaves": gathering food together and making a single object out of it.

"Threshing": separating [food from its natural container]; includes squeezing fruit for its juice, milking, and drawing blood.

7. & 9. "Winnowing", "Separating", "Sifting": separating food from inedible matter or solids from liquids or one food from another (except to eat immediately).

"Grinding": dividing an object into many small parts. Many medical treatments are rabbinically forbidden to one who is not sick since they may lead to "grinding" (drugs).

"Kneading": [mixing a finely divided solid with liquid until it becomes a single object].

"Baking": cooking (hardening or softening) an object or heating a liquid using heat originating from a fire; with heat from other sources it is rabbinically forbidden. Bathing in hot water is rabbinically forbidden since it may lead to heating water. Salting and pickling are rabbinically forbidden since they resemble cooking.

"Shearing": detaching hair, feathers, or nails from skin.

"Whitening": washing materials or clothes (or rabbinically, spreading them to dry or folding them).

"Carding": separating an object into fibers.

"Dyeing": permanently coloring an object or liquid.

"Spinning": making fibers into thread or felt.

to 19. "Weaving": making threads into cloth (includes basket-weaving, plaiting, and the like).

"Unweaving".

"Tying": making permanent knots (includes twisting rope).

"Untying".

"Sewing": includes pasting together.

"Tearing".

"Building": putting parts together and making a single object; includes making floors, walls, or roofs, making utensils, and making cheese. If the structure is not permanent the prohibition is at most rabbinical.

"Tearing down".

"Hitting with a hammer : finishing part of a structure or utensil. It is rabbinically forbidden to play music since it may lead to making or repairing a musical instrument; to swim, since it may lead to making a life preserver; or to wash utensils if they are not needed for the sabbath.

"Hunting": capturing a creature that is normally hunted.

"Slaughtering": taking life.

"Skinning": [removing a layer from an object].

"Tanning": [softening] something other than food.

"Smoothing".

"Cutting": something other than food to a desired size.

"Writing". All business transactions, acts of court, and related calculations or measurements are rabbinically forbidden since they may lead to writing.

"Erasing".

"Marking": in preparation for cutting or writing.

"Burning": making a fire or adding fuel to it; includes heating metal. It is rabbinically forbidden to handle a fire or to make use of it in cases where this may lead to adjusting it.

"Extinguishing": or removing fuel; includes tempering metal. One is allowed to rescue only a limited amount from a fire since otherwise one may come to extinguish it.

"Taking from one domain to another" (i.e., from a private to a public domain or vice versa) by carrying or throwing; includes moving objects four cubits or more in a public domain. Public domains include marketplaces and roads that are at least 16 cubits wide and are not roofed over. A private domain must be at least four handsbreadths square and must be surrounded by a wall at least ten handsbreadths high or must be at least ten handsbreadths higher or lower than its surroundings. It is rabbinically forbidden to move objects four cubits or more even in a karmelis (a domain at least four handsbreadths square that [is adjacent to a public domain and] is separated from it by a wall, height, or depth of between three and ten handsbreadths) or to take anything from a karmelis to either a public or private domain or vice versa. If a private domain is not primarily for dwelling and is more than 70 cubits square it is also forbidden to move objects four cubits or more in it.

 

 

Any other ways that Christ didn't fulfill the law?

 

Christ couldn't have fulfilled any of the laws pertaining to women or High priests, hence he couldn't have fulfilled ALL the laws.

[SkepticOfBible]

The point is this about the passage in Matthew. They did not disobey the law because they were not working when they were picking up the wheat. They were hungry, completely within the Law, Det. 22.

....

Look at Deuteronomy. They were not working because they did not pick up the "sicle". They were hungry.

 

 

Deutronomny makes no such claim. the word sabbath is not even mentioned in those verses

 

It is simply stating that if you are gonna harvest grain from your neighbours' farmyard, then do it with your hand.

 

You are adding mental qualifiers to the Deaut law. What you you really want it to say

 

Deuteronomy 23:25 (New International Version)

25 If you enter your neighbor's grainfield, you may pick kernels with your hands(WHICH IS NOT WORK), but you must not put a sickle to his standing grain(BECAUSE IF YOU DO THEN IT CONSIDERED WORK). YOU MAY ALSO PICK GRAINS ON THE SABBATH.

 

If you want to do mental gymnastic with the verses, then it's fine. You are only being dishonest with yourself.

 

I have done that with the "Sabbath" attempt made by you and how, really it didn't even involve Christ, but His disciples. And it wasn't a breach of the Law to begin with because you are allowed to pick for food if you pass by somebody's field on the Sabbath, you just can't pick up a sicle and start working.

 

Once again the deautronomy law does not mention anything about the sabbath, nor do you believe Jesus himself.

 

If there was loophole that I am sure Jesus would have mentioned and it certainly would have spared the debate between you and me(and within the christian world).Please do tell the bible.ca that they are spreading false information about Jesus telling others to break the sabbath. It is quite a popular site amongst christians.

 

Jesus was getting across the point that ethics is more important than ritual

 

Did I say anything different

 

In other words he was talking about situational ethics.

 

However the OT says otherwise, the laws are abosolute (including the rituals) and are to be followed forever

 

"SHOW ME VERSES FROM THE OT WHICH SAYS THAT LAWS WOULD NOT NEED TO BE FOLLOWED UNDER THE NC."

 

You are forgetting the point and purpose of the Law. It was to reveal the sin we all have. It was not for man to abide by forever.

 

I had asked you about the law in the "One verse at a time thread". I think my answer to this reply would be more suitable there.

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?show...=137023�

 

Any other ways that Christ didn't fulfill the law?

Sure, lets pick a more easy one.

 

5)Participating in the Pagan ritual of baptism

5.) How was it a pagan ritual?

 

This is my correspondance with Gotquestions.org

 

Question: Could you show me verses of Baptism in OT, like the way John baptises Jesus?

Answered by: Shea

 

Answer: The Old Testament nowhere mentions the concept of baptism

This concept certainly did not come from the god of the OT, so for sure it must have come from the Pagans. Pagans are known of have rituals where water is supposed to be “wash” away your sins (Which is probably the reasons why many Gentile converted, It was something they were familar with.)

 

So what was Jesus doing in this ritual. Aren’t adoptation of heathen practices forbidden and is considered a sin?

 

PS:If you want to key to my arguements and think you can beat them, just goto to the site in my signature ie if you have "faith" in your belief. Make sure you check out VARIOUS CHRISTIAN CLAIMS AND ARGUEMENTS

[thunderbolt]

So what was Jesus doing in this ritual. Aren’t adoptation of heathen practices forbidden and is considered a sin?

 

Added to this contradiction, is the fact that John's baptism is called the baptism of REPENTANCE. Excuse me; I thought Jesus was without sin? What did he need to participate in such a ritual for. BIG oops for the forger of Acts.

 

But I see the translators caught on, because they sure use license to soften the blow. http://bible.cc/acts/19-4.htm

[Amanda]

You are forgetting the point and purpose of the Law. It was to reveal the sin we all have. It was not for man to abide by forever. It was given to them for the time that they lived -- Israel was to be the beacon of the world. Now it is Jesus Christ for the "Jew first but also the Greek". Of course the Law will be observed for eternity, the Law is Christ, because Christ fulfilled the Law.

 

You cannot pin me down to just OT verses, because we are not dealing with a books theme that is based on the OT law specifically. The Bible's center point is Christ and all things should be looked at through Him. With that in mind, there is no need to show you verses that say the OT laws would not need to be followed because of Christ. What I need to show you is how Christ, fulfilled those laws, thus becoming, in essence, the ultimate fulfiller of the law and the New law or Covenant.

 

Hi Sub Zero! I can agree with you in many regards here... that these laws were to get people of those times to recognize some codes of ethics! The literal interpretation of them became too important over time, condemning everyone, and Christ just wanted to suggest to use REASON when considering them... hence changing obedience to these laws to a desire to fulfill them, by our Christ nature. You make sense to me here, however...

 

My friend, do you really believe a devil swooped down and took possession of a snake and made it talk? Then God punished the snake for it? And what is a devil, an invisible force that flies around and attacks by attaching itself to people and animals like a ghost or something?

 

Sub Zero, just think about this. Hey, I had some ideas when I came here that I have changed. It is threatening inside to consider something as a core foundation to your beliefs may be wrong... but don't you want to know the truth anyway? It's hard. No one here is trying to be mean to you ... everyone just wants you to THINK. I feel you have a lot to offer here, yet I think you probably have a lot you can take from here too. If what you believe is true, it will stand... however some of it may need adjusting. I think there are a lot of positive aspects you can keep about your beliefs, just take the time to critically examine if you've really interpreted them critically by REASON and they make sense to you.

[Amanda]

Nope, and whoever takes that stance, is a idiot and closeminded. All religious books in the world have some good advice them. Have you ever read the Bhagwad Gita?

 

Everybody needs a break from work, but I think it is stupid to punish someone if he takes a a break on Wednesday, and there is no doubt in my mind a lot of people had lost their lives over this weird rule.

 

Hi Pritishd! I'm going to look up the Bhagwad Gita right now! I know I will love it.

 

I didn't mean to take a break on Wednesday in addition to the weekend! Nor for it to have anything to do with Jesus or the Jews! What I intended by that is that I think it MIGHT be good for everyone to take a break on the same day with almost everything closed... yet it didn't have to be on a day because it is the sabbath or the last day of the week... pick one day, any day, and not to honor God but to honor each other as a community and a family! Just to do things together instead of running off to the mall or playing golf or running to work, which seems to scatter the family and community. Just have one day that everyone stays local and builds a relationship with each other. That's how it was when I was a child. Heck, just think of the implications if we just did it once a month! It seems now we only do it on special holidays like Thanksgiving and Christmas.

 

And of course... NO ONE SHOULD LOSE THEIR LIFE OVER THIS IDEA!

[NotBlinded]

Hey you all, I'm curious about having this day of not working. I've been thinking about it... and if we had almost every single business closed on one day of the week, ANY day, except for maybe a few drug stores, gas stations, hotels, hospitals... what implications would that have on families and communities? Do you think it would cause families and communities to become more positively influence and more tightly woven together? I'm just curious...

That was like that here when I was a child. There are still small towns that shut down on Sunday and cars still can't be sold on Sunday. I don't think they were more woven together, they just went without what they needed for one day.

[Eponymic]

Sinned, didn't sin, whatever, it's all mythology to me. So if you're debating it, great, just remember it's all the same as debating any other mythology.

[Amanda]

That was like that here when I was a child. There are still small towns that shut down on Sunday and cars still can't be sold on Sunday. I don't think they were more woven together, they just went without what they needed for one day.

NBBTB, that's how it was when I was a young child too. TV was very limited, and no computer games... or computers! Everyone did something together as a family and a community. There was nothing else to do! We had cook outs together, visiting across the backyard fences, kids playing baseball, etc. It just seemed more like a friendlier community.

 

I suppose today with all the TV and computers... to regain this, it would just have to be a conscious effort and initiative within individuals... and not dependent on a mandatory day off. Maybe that would be more meaningful anyway?

[NotBlinded]

That was like that here when I was a child. There are still small towns that shut down on Sunday and cars still can't be sold on Sunday. I don't think they were more woven together, they just went without what they needed for one day.

NBBTB, that's how it was when I was a young child too. TV was very limited, and no computer games... or computers! Everyone did something together as a family and a community. There was nothing else to do! We had cook outs together, visiting across the backyard fences, kids playing baseball, etc. It just seemed more like a friendlier community.

 

I suppose today with all the TV and computers... to regain this, it would just have to be a conscious effort and initiative within individuals... and not dependent on a mandatory day off. Maybe that would be more meaningful anyway?

Yes, that I can understand! Our minds are occupied with technology, not homogeny.

[Levi]

This accusation is based according to law and understanding of the carnality of Man and not of the devine intervention and holiness of God.

[scotter]

Levi you have pre-constructed Jesus is God because that is your belief, so Jesus is right.

 

It was also God who gave Israel through Moses the Laws.

And Levi if you believe Trinity, it was the Triune God including Jesus revealed to Israel in Mount Sinai about the Laws.

Jesus told Israel one thing in Mount Sinai, Jesus told Israel one thing in his ministry, Jesus told Israel via Paul one thing in his post-ministry.

 

Again this will never get resolved.

[jrmarlin]

Actually Sub, the Bible said that Jesus was the SON of God, NOT God.

 

Another incident where I catch and Xian not even knowing the book they claim is their GOSPEL.

 

Jesus did claim to be God. And that is bearing FALSE WITNESS.

 

That's a SIN.

 

Please, for God's sake, read the frigging bible before you come on these treads and try to tell people what's what. This misinformationative Haze most Xians live in does get very boring, very fast.

 

 

This accusation is based according to law and understanding of the carnality of Man and not of the devine intervention and holiness of God.

That made absolutely NO sense whatsoever... And this is pretaining to this subject how? Or do you have a word limit you have to hit everyday and you just merely spout BS on these treads in order to hit your limit?

[Lycorth]

This accusation is based according to law and understanding of the carnality of Man and not of the devine intervention and holiness of God.

 

Yet another example of how if you don't agree with the Xian position, you're knowingly choosing a false and evil road. When will Xians get it through their thick skulls that everything is not black and white, that everything is not "Gawd vs Satan"?

 

The so-called "divine intervention and holiness" of your god is nonexistent. There is no proof nor compelling evidence any such thing exists or ever has. Humans, whether or not they like it, base everything off their own laws and understanding, even when they think they're being guided by some holy spook. It's all really just humans making decisions, just using different things to motivate themselves.

 

Xians motivate themselves with their Babble, yet trick themselves into thinking it's the Holah Spook motivating them. A spiritual placebo, if you will.

[jrmarlin]

This accusation is based according to law and understanding of the carnality of Man and not of the devine intervention and holiness of God.

 

Yet another example of how if you don't agree with the Xian position, you're knowingly choosing a false and evil road. When will Xians get it through their thick skulls that everything is not black and white, that everything is not "Gawd vs Satan"?

 

The so-called "divine intervention and holiness" of your god is nonexistent. There is no proof nor compelling evidence any such thing exists or ever has. Humans, whether or not they like it, base everything off their own laws and understanding, even when they think they're being guided by some holy spook. It's all really just humans making decisions, just using different things to motivate themselves.

 

Xians motivate themselves with their Babble, yet trick themselves into thinking it's the Holah Spook motivating them. A spiritual placebo, if you will.

 

I love that -- a spiritual placebo. That's a cool term. Kudos to you!