African Children Denounced As "Witches" By Christian Pastors

[RandomGuy]

If you buy into the 'Jesus died to give you eternal life" argument then saving Jesus would be dumb. if you don't buy into it and he was just a man then fighting the Romans to try and save him would be dumb.

Kind of an important point wrapped up there. Why did God not choose to just simply bypass the human sacrifice part?

Why not simply forgive the original sin directly?

It seems to me a bit parallel to the existence of Indiana Jones in the Raiders of the Lost Ark. Dr. Jones could have spent the entire movie selling hot dogs, let the Nazi's find the ark, then kill themselves anyway, and swoop in after they all died. Why bother?

[boutons_deux]

The entire "Jesus died for your sins" is bull . Lays guilt on everyone who never sinned, like babies out of the womb. Make everyone "indebted" to the Christian religion, so keep sending in the hings.

Jesus died because we as seen as subversive both by the Romans and by the Jewish establishment. He wasn't "fighting" either one. They "fought", killed Him for his subversive ideas.

Parthenogenesis? Immaculate Conception? Miracles? Resurrection? Jesus as God? All marketing bull , all deeply, aggressively anti-woman (Jesus couldn't be soiled by a filthy vagina and normal human sex), fabrications to combat the other religions, world views, philosophies in the 100s of years AFTER His death.

[Phenomanul]

A step forward. Thank you.

How do you know the Gospels account of the date of the crucifixion is accurate? Because the Gospels say so?

Was born during Herod's reign, during the time of the Roman census (verifiable through separate historical accounts), lived 33 years (fulfilling the prophecy of Daniel 9), was tried in a Roman tribunal presided by Pontius Pilate, died during the week of the Jewish Passover.

IF your starting premise is that the Gospels are pure bunk, why debate any of their points at all? It's an exercise in futility. There isn't enough time to explain the context surrounding subject matter you clearly already reject.

[RandomGuy]

353 Separate prophetical clauses are fulfilled by JESUS according to the following list.

http://www.accordingtothescriptures....rophecies.html

The likelihood that any one person in history would satisfy all of those - every single one - is astoundingly low.

I could write a book about a guy today that would do just that. Again, not overly convincing. "fulfilling" vague prophecies is more of an exercise in confirmation bias than anything a rational being would use to determine how to live one's life, IMO.

[RandomGuy]

Was born during Herod's reign, during the time of the Roman census (verifiable through separate historical accounts), lived 33 years (fulfilling the prophecy of Daniel 9), was tried in a Roman tribunal presided by Pontius Pilate, died during the week of the Jewish Passover.

IF your starting premise is that the Gospels are pure bunk, why debate any of their points at all? It's an exercise in futility. There isn't enough time to explain the context surrounding subject matter you clearly already reject.

So you know the Gospels are true... because the Gospels say they are.

I don't really have a starting premise, other than mere skepticism. To me, the entire premise of such things is more proof of a man-made construct than divine communication from a being capable of bringing a vast universe into existence.

I withhold belief until there is a good reason to believe. Having a book that proclaims its own truth means I can't tell it from the other books that proclaim their own truths.

There is a fine line between not accepting something as true, and thinking it is false.

[RandomGuy]

I imagine it something like this:

God: i'm gonna create a universe.
Helper: ok, sounds great. let's do it.
(POOF)
God: i'm gonna create sentient beings
Helper: ok, sounds great. let's do it.
(POOF)
God: I'm going to communicate with them and give my Word to them.
Helper: ok, sounds great, I will put some giant flaming symbols in the sky... or do you want to just hard-wire it into their DNA?
God: Neither, I'm going to give them a book.
Helper: um... okay. Are they all going to be born knowing how to read it? are the books going to magically appear to everybody everywhere?
God: no, I'm going to just give my Word to this group here. The book will just be for the people who can read that language.
Helper: um... wouldn't it be better to just give some universal PA system thing to everybody all at once?
God: No, just a book and just to this one group.
Helper: umm... why?
God: because I love these beings, but this one group more than any other. the book that I give them says so.
Helper: um... okaay.

etc.

[Phenomanul]

Kind of an important point wrapped up there. Why did God not choose to just simply bypass the human sacrifice part?

If the consequences of sin is death... the payment for sin is life.

We were atoned by the most perfect life of all - which is why we now have direct access to GOD Himself.

Why not simply forgive the original sin directly?

What's a few thousand years in the context of Eternity...? What's 10,000 years compared to 100 Billion years, how about against 100 Trillion years...?

In mathematical terms it was addressed "quickly"

Conceptually, however, the answer you seek is a bit more complex. And because it uses other scriptures to support it, you likely wouldn't accept the answer anyways...

It seems to me a bit parallel to the existence of Indiana Jones in the Raiders of the Lost Ark. Dr. Jones could have spent the entire movie selling hot dogs, let the Nazi's find the ark, then kill themselves anyway, and swoop in after they all died. Why bother?

Because Indiana Jones could not have foreseen the negligence with which the Nazis lead to their own demise. The Nazis bit off more than they could chew. Jones had no way of knowing how they would use the Ark.

[RandomGuy]

If the consequences of sin is death... the payment for sin is life.

Why?

[Phenomanul]

I imagine it something like this:

God: i'm gonna create a universe.
Helper: ok, sounds great. let's do it.
(POOF)
God: i'm gonna create sentient beings
Helper: ok, sounds great. let's do it.
(POOF)
God: I'm going to communicate with them and give my Word to them.
Helper: ok, sounds great, I will put some giant flaming symbols in the sky... or do you want to just hard-wire it into their DNA?
God: Neither, I'm going to give them a book.
Helper: um... okay. Are they all going to be born knowing how to read it? are the books going to magically appear to everybody everywhere?
God: no, I'm going to just give my Word to this group here. The book will just be for the people who can read that language.
Helper: um... wouldn't it be better to just give some universal PA system thing to everybody all at once?
God: No, just a book and just to this one group.
Helper: umm... why?
God: because I love these beings, but this one group more than any other. the book that I give them says so.
Helper: um... okaay.

etc.

Many assumptions on your part in creating that alternative narrative to simplify that which you refuse to accept.

But hey... you have the liberty to think whatever you want.

[Phenomanul]

I could write a book about a guy today that would do just that. Again, not overly convincing. "fulfilling" vague prophecies is more of an exercise in confirmation bias than anything a rational being would use to determine how to live one's life, IMO.

Ok. Now do that without knowing what the prophecies are, because you are amongst a group of people who are being hunted down by the very authorities who have those writings in their possession.

Thanks for playing.

And THAT my friend was the hurdle. YET Christ fulfills every prophecy concerning himself found in the canon of Hebrew/Judaic writings, every single one --> again, a mathematical improbability (which isn't proof in and unto itself, just more context supporting the notion that Jesus was who he claimed to be).

[Phenomanul]

I am impressed by the number of amateur religious scholars in here. Wouldn't have thought to find that in a political forum.

Adherents should strive to be scholars.

Why believe anything if you don't know why you believe it?

[boutons_deux]

Adherents should strive to be scholars.

Christian scholars, without any serious doubt, or creative thoughts = directed reasoning, simple-minded apologists.

[CosmicCowboy]

Many assumptions on your part in creating that alternative narrative to simplify that which you refuse to accept.

But hey... you have the liberty to think whatever you want.

The problem I had with religion from an early age was the concept that you had to believe in Jesus to have "eternal life". I couldn't wrap my head around the fact that no matter how "good" they were, 2/3 of the worlds population was doomed from the start because they weren't exposed to conventional Christian theology.

[RandomGuy]

Many assumptions on your part in creating that alternative narrative to simplify that which you refuse to accept.

But hey... you have the liberty to think whatever you want.

It was meant more in humor, to demonstrate a decision tree. Lighten up.

[Phenomanul]

Why?

It's a preordained dynamic that we don't fully understand. If GOD is Light. Sin is Darkness. IF GOD is Love. Sin is Hate. If GOD is Life. Sin is Death. IMO I believe sin has existed for as long as GOD has. In the absence of GOD sin is allowed to reign.

Sin was given a "death knell" of sorts on Calvary - and will ultimately be wiped from existence after Judgement Day (I hear the Terminator theme playing in my mind now).

[RandomGuy]

Ok. Now do that without knowing what the prophecies are, because you are amongst a group of people who are being hunted down by the very authorities who have those writings in their possession.

Thanks for playing.

And THAT my friend was the hurdle. YET Christ fulfills every prophecy concerning himself found in the canon of Hebrew/Judaic writings, every single one --> again, a mathematical improbability (which isn't proof in and unto itself, just more context supporting the notion that Jesus was who he claimed to be).

You know exactly the cir stances under which all the new testament in its current modern form was written? Do tell.

I am not really interested in the "my book is so special because..." tropes. Every religion has its apologists who make the excuses and fit evidence into narratives that make their book "miraculous". I have a feeling that the same level of logical and evidentiary failings await me down that road about the same as what I found when looking into creationists' claims about evolution, and that is never very convincing. If you really want to, I can, as I am always willing to listen/learn.

What does interest me far more is the ins and outs of the tenets.

[RandomGuy]

It's a preordained dynamic that we don't fully understand. If GOD is Light. Sin is Darkness. IF GOD is Love. Sin is Hate. If GOD is Life. Sin is Death. IMO I believe sin has existed for as long as GOD has. In the absence of GOD sin is allowed to reign.

Sin was given a "death knell" of sorts on Calvary - and will ultimately be wiped from existence after Judgement Day (I hear the Terminator theme playing in my mind now).

What is "sin"? And why do you think God is love?

[Phenomanul]

Christian scholars, without any serious doubt, or creative thoughts = directed reasoning, simple-minded apologists.

I've read more books on these subjects than you could fathom. I've been doing that for the past 28 years. You pick up a thing or two (beyond the obligatory "gfy" you've grown accustomed to dishing left and right). I've not secluded or isolated myself like a monk. In fact, I've been picking up "scholarly" merits over the past few years. Just recently I received a degree in Ocean Sciences and another in Robotics. My mantra has been "to never stop learning." That I don't fit the mold of your athiest gods Richard Dawkins or Steven Hawking despite my scholarly ap udes (8 degrees and counting) I know drives you crazy. But yeah, I'm not ashamed to say that I also believe in JESUS CHRIST. It's only an irreconcilable dichotomy in your mind because you've already said in your heart, "there is no GOD".

To quote Einstein, "I reserve the right to be smarter today than I was yesterday..."

[Phenomanul]

What is "sin"? And why do you think God is love?

Sin is all the things that GOD isn't.

Just like cold is defined by the absence of heat, or darkness defined by the absence of light.

The second part of your question requires a wholly separate conversation... given that people have different interpretations of what "love" is.

[Chinook]

I imagine it something like this:

God: i'm gonna create a universe.
Helper: ok, sounds great. let's do it.
(POOF)
God: i'm gonna create sentient beings
Helper: ok, sounds great. let's do it.
(POOF)
God: I'm going to communicate with them and give my Word to them.
Helper: ok, sounds great, I will put some giant flaming symbols in the sky... or do you want to just hard-wire it into their DNA?
God: Neither, I'm going to give them a book.
Helper: um... okay. Are they all going to be born knowing how to read it? are the books going to magically appear to everybody everywhere?
God: no, I'm going to just give my Word to this group here. The book will just be for the people who can read that language.
Helper: um... wouldn't it be better to just give some universal PA system thing to everybody all at once?
God: No, just a book and just to this one group.
Helper: umm... why?
God: because I love these beings, but this one group more than any other. the book that I give them says so.
Helper: um... okaay.

etc.

Forgot the part where God makes it clear that only acceptable way to live happens to be exact way that group of live (specifically the people who are in power within that group) right down to the diet, sexual orientation and the length of their beards.

[Phenomanul]

The problem I had with religion from an early age was the concept that you had to believe in Jesus to have "eternal life". I couldn't wrap my head around the fact that no matter how "good" they were, 2/3 of the worlds population was doomed from the start because they weren't exposed to conventional Christian theology.

I use to have the same struggle trying to reconcile GOD's justice and His sense of Grace. But that's just it... Scripture reveals that no one is good enough. We're all sinners. All of us. Even on our best day, we fail to meet the sanc y and holiness required to appease GOD's justice. Ultimately, we're all accountable for our own actions because the law reveals our imperfection -- it is the law which reveals, but ultimately our own actions that condemn us. Only one was perfect, JESUS.

Children, which have no concept of 'right and wrong' are exempted from this system of justice by GOD's grace.

Everyone else will be accountable for their actions. So who else can they blame for their actions...? How is that unfair...?

"Sorry officer, I didn't know that in this jurisdiction the law was applied differently. Am I still accountable for breaking the law...?"

[CosmicCowboy]

Ok but let's take a perfect, peaceful, loving Buddhist for example. Your god condemns him to because he was born in India and wasn't culturally exposed to baby Jesus?

[Phenomanul]

Ok but let's take a perfect, peaceful, loving Buddhist for example. Your god condemns him to because r was born in India and wasn't culturally exposed to baby Jesus?

We can only see the outside. GOD sees the heart.

Everyone of us fails the "test of holiness" on that front.

[Phenomanul]

The "Church" isn't doing their job if they aren't being a light unto the nations. It doesn't necessarily mean that everyone must convert. It simply means that everyone must be exposed to the Gospel. Ultimately, people will choose to receive or reject the Gospel message.

[Phenomanul]

Anyways, I have to run to Home Depot to get some things to install a projector off of the ceiling. Later peeps.