ChatterBank5 mins ago
A question for Christians
109 Answers
You're told Jesus died for you personally because God loves you, and this appalling death was necessary in order for your sins to be forgiven. Of course, God is omnipotent, apparently, so we cannot possibly believe there was no other way, but that aside, I would hate to think that someone deliberately planned to torture and execute a man on my behalf, so given a choice, would you have allowed it to happen?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I seems to me that the threat of hell fire and eternal torment would be most effective on those who believe they have earned it and deserve it, no less those seeking to derive benefit from another's unjustifiable suffering.
I can think of no more twisted form of immorality then that espoused by those who subscribe to the sacrifice of the good for the sake of the evil.
I can think of no more twisted form of immorality then that espoused by those who subscribe to the sacrifice of the good for the sake of the evil.
Elderman - “... Can some wicked, invisible power be influencing humans to these acts of violence? Is there really a Devil?”
No. There is no such thing as 'the' Devil or 'a' Devil. There is no invisible, supernatural, evil entity that influences human beings. To think that there is is to delude yourself and to abrogate responsibility from those people who chose to commit appalling acts against their fellow human beings. People who assault, maim and murder people do not do so because of some supernatural bogey man.
The belief in Satan or the Devil is a childish thing that should be discarded as easily as we discard the belief in Father Christmas or the Tooth Fairy.
No. There is no such thing as 'the' Devil or 'a' Devil. There is no invisible, supernatural, evil entity that influences human beings. To think that there is is to delude yourself and to abrogate responsibility from those people who chose to commit appalling acts against their fellow human beings. People who assault, maim and murder people do not do so because of some supernatural bogey man.
The belief in Satan or the Devil is a childish thing that should be discarded as easily as we discard the belief in Father Christmas or the Tooth Fairy.
"Jesus... I do feel a bit sorry for the bloke really, a bit of a show off and obviously had the gift of the gab but his heart was in the right place."
well that carries as much weight in fact as the biblical accounts themselves. what do you know of this jesus bloke that makes you assume his 'heart was in the right place'. maybe he was a vicious political terrorist who manipulated the vulnerable for his own ends. maybe he didn't even exist.
what do you really know abut him then to qualify your statement ?
well that carries as much weight in fact as the biblical accounts themselves. what do you know of this jesus bloke that makes you assume his 'heart was in the right place'. maybe he was a vicious political terrorist who manipulated the vulnerable for his own ends. maybe he didn't even exist.
what do you really know abut him then to qualify your statement ?
The question I would like answered is one of ethics. How can anyone accept that his soul has been saved because a man was condemned to suffer and die horribly - and in this case, since God is omnipotent, clearly completely unnecessarily?
How do Christians live with that thought - and still feel good about themselves? Surely, a person of moral principle would be horrified at such a suggestion, and reject it totally.
How do Christians live with that thought - and still feel good about themselves? Surely, a person of moral principle would be horrified at such a suggestion, and reject it totally.
because in thier view he recieved the ultimate reward and that was to be 'at the right hand of his father' etc etc.
his suffering was only temporary, and it was his sacrifice, and he earned his place in heaven blah blah blah. their rolein life is to respect that sacrifice and live good lives byt it, yadda yadda.
this is all gcse re stuff.
his suffering was only temporary, and it was his sacrifice, and he earned his place in heaven blah blah blah. their rolein life is to respect that sacrifice and live good lives byt it, yadda yadda.
this is all gcse re stuff.
Naomi24, I don't really think people can answer that easily, I think if you are a Christian and therefore you believe in all that, then you are in a different mind set to non-believers.
I really cannot get my head around it myself, I would hate to think that anybody died to forgive me my sins!
Apart from that, if someone has sinned against me, I am the only person to forgive them that sin, I really don't want anybody forgiving them that sin on my behalf .
I really cannot get my head around it myself, I would hate to think that anybody died to forgive me my sins!
Apart from that, if someone has sinned against me, I am the only person to forgive them that sin, I really don't want anybody forgiving them that sin on my behalf .
Ratter, //I don't really think people can answer that easily, I think if you are a Christian and therefore you believe in all that, then you are in a different mind set to non-believers.//
So does that mean Christian belief negates the moral requirement to embrace civilised human principles?
Where are all the Christians?
So does that mean Christian belief negates the moral requirement to embrace civilised human principles?
Where are all the Christians?
////Keyplus, if you want to talk about the crucifixion, please post a separate question elsewhere. This question is not about Islam.////
This question is about "so called" sacrifice of Jesus (pbuh). And that is known as crucifixion "although I call it crucifiction". And I gave a link where someone proved from within Bible "so nothing directly to do with Islam" and you are saying that my post is irrelevant? In other words one more time I have shown you something you are not willing to see.
This question is about "so called" sacrifice of Jesus (pbuh). And that is known as crucifixion "although I call it crucifiction". And I gave a link where someone proved from within Bible "so nothing directly to do with Islam" and you are saying that my post is irrelevant? In other words one more time I have shown you something you are not willing to see.
Not just your personal sins Ankou but the responsibility for the sins of your great, great grandparents (all sixteen of them). Women can add the responsibility for Eve's original transgression.
We are all sinners on behalf of others so we really need to be grateful that God organised for the torture of His own son to satisfy His lust for pain so that he could even consider giving anyone a chance to impress Him.
We are all sinners on behalf of others so we really need to be grateful that God organised for the torture of His own son to satisfy His lust for pain so that he could even consider giving anyone a chance to impress Him.
beso, can we expect another sacrifice sometime soon to help us all out again then ? its been at least 2000 years, and that can only mean a ot of sinning has been going on wihile god aint looking.
anyway, i sense this thread will begin drifting down the old familiar naomi/keyplus river again so i'll go away and ponder what bad things my great great grandaddy did and who should pay.
anyway, i sense this thread will begin drifting down the old familiar naomi/keyplus river again so i'll go away and ponder what bad things my great great grandaddy did and who should pay.
The Hebrew God adopted by both the Christians and Moslems (under various names just to contradict each other) is a hideous monster.
Those who affiliate themselves with the Bible, Koran or are part of any of the Abrahamic religions are intrinsic supporters of this hideous creature by virtue of their acknowledgement and acceptance of the divine status of their church, its legendary heros and exalted text.
I fully support the concept of a greater good but those who seek it in ancient texts are barking up the wrong tree entirely.
Abrahamic religion preaches enlightenment through complete submission and mindless acceptance of a doctrine. It is exactly the opposite to the process of genuine enlightnment where one strives for complete awareness of the question rather than a simplistic faith where the answer is first determined and only questions that can be ansered with "God" are ever contemplated.
Those who affiliate themselves with the Bible, Koran or are part of any of the Abrahamic religions are intrinsic supporters of this hideous creature by virtue of their acknowledgement and acceptance of the divine status of their church, its legendary heros and exalted text.
I fully support the concept of a greater good but those who seek it in ancient texts are barking up the wrong tree entirely.
Abrahamic religion preaches enlightenment through complete submission and mindless acceptance of a doctrine. It is exactly the opposite to the process of genuine enlightnment where one strives for complete awareness of the question rather than a simplistic faith where the answer is first determined and only questions that can be ansered with "God" are ever contemplated.
Keyplus, //This question is about "so called" sacrifice of Jesus//
No it isn't. It's about principles, but you, like some others here, clearly don't understand the meaning of the word 'principle'.
//you are saying that my post is irrelevant?//
Yes I am, as are your links.
//In other words one more time I have shown you something you are not willing to see.//
Stop being silly - and don't make assumptions. To an extent I happen to agree with you - but this is not the place to discuss that and I don't want this thread going down the Islamic route as so many others do when you're around. This is about Christianity.
Beso, it seems to me that when this God issued his bargain, he relied not only upon the pain of human emotion, but also on the basest of selfish instinct.
Scenario:
'I'll torture and murder someone, and if you overlook my horrendous and unnecessary cruelty, abandon your intellect to my will, and worship me in the most subservient way, I'll let you come and live with me when you're dead'.
Who would want to?
No it isn't. It's about principles, but you, like some others here, clearly don't understand the meaning of the word 'principle'.
//you are saying that my post is irrelevant?//
Yes I am, as are your links.
//In other words one more time I have shown you something you are not willing to see.//
Stop being silly - and don't make assumptions. To an extent I happen to agree with you - but this is not the place to discuss that and I don't want this thread going down the Islamic route as so many others do when you're around. This is about Christianity.
Beso, it seems to me that when this God issued his bargain, he relied not only upon the pain of human emotion, but also on the basest of selfish instinct.
Scenario:
'I'll torture and murder someone, and if you overlook my horrendous and unnecessary cruelty, abandon your intellect to my will, and worship me in the most subservient way, I'll let you come and live with me when you're dead'.
Who would want to?
Naomi //'I'll torture and murder someone, and if you overlook my horrendous and unnecessary cruelty, abandon your intellect to my will, and worship me in the most subservient way, I'll let you come and live with me when you're dead'.
Who would want to? //
Very insightful but I don't think the ancients got past the idea of what God could do to their enemies given sufficient sycophantic prompting. Similar to those kids we all knew at school who were able to inflict their judgement by pressing the buttons of brainless thugs.
Who would want to? //
Very insightful but I don't think the ancients got past the idea of what God could do to their enemies given sufficient sycophantic prompting. Similar to those kids we all knew at school who were able to inflict their judgement by pressing the buttons of brainless thugs.
No, you can't make the distincition between Jesus and God and be even remotely 'Christian'. And necessity is absolutely ruled out. God was not under necessity, the Bible makes that clear because of the apalling consequences of such an absurdity. And, you explicitly reject the Trinity teaching when you say that 'deliberately planned' nonsense. Again, what does Scripture say about that ?
2 Corinthians 5:19
God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation.
IT does anger me when someone like you studiously avoids quoting the definitive interpretations of Scripture in order to caricature belief. I am a convert.
2 Corinthians 5:19
God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation.
IT does anger me when someone like you studiously avoids quoting the definitive interpretations of Scripture in order to caricature belief. I am a convert.
It is clear from Jesus’ teachings that he intended for his disciples to have a balanced view of non-Christians. On the one hand, he said that his followers would be separate from the world—that is, they would shun attitudes and conduct that were in conflict with God’s righteous ways. They would remain neutral in matters of war and politics and all the pagan belief in Christmas easter or the Tooth Fairy. (John 17:14, 16) On the other hand, far from preaching contempt for non-Christians, Jesus told his followers to ‘love their enemies.’ (Matthew 5:44)
Yes,by providing the ransom sacrifice, God made it possible for those who exercise faith to have a balanced of non -christians
Yes,by providing the ransom sacrifice, God made it possible for those who exercise faith to have a balanced of non -christians
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles35 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles44 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles59 mins ago
ChatterBank68 mins ago
Film, Media & TV78 mins ago
