Why did God forgive our sins?

Sorry I probably was not clear on this. I meant that because #1 indicates "destroying/utter destruction" + "of vessles" and #2 "a perishing, ruin, destruction" + "of money". That is why #3 should be used in this context. Ok, again what is this destruction Jesus is talking about. You still are skirting around this issue. And what would that something be? Who is disputing this? Are you certain everyone in this band of disciples were saved? Even 1 of his own hand picked apostles turned against him and then hung himself. I seriously doubt all these disciples were saved hense the reason for his moral disertation on the sermon on the mount. In fact the word disciple used in Matthew 5:1 in greek is (mathtai) litteraly means pupil or one who learns. There is no indications that they were all saved or why would Jesus give this warming just a few verses after his warning of the narrow and wide gate: I think the vast majority of born again Christians and ministers would disagree with you. To me it makes no difference since I think this is all fabricated anyways. Than I am surprised in your ignorance that interpretation of the meaning of words is inherent to the translation process. And how are you translating the now unspoken Koine Greek words into modern English? What sources are you using to translate these words?
Yes, it is still interpretation. The only way it would not be interpretation is if Jesus came down to you and in-depth told you face to face what he meant by what he said in this passage. Because I gave you a laundry list of the meanings of the word and you chose to only pick one vague meaning "ruin" vice the other meanings more commonly used definitions such as "utter destruction" that fits the context and is adopted by 99% of born-again Christians. We are actually both interpreting this word, just differently. I just choose to accept this fact and you keep standing on your soap box insisting you aren't. Yes, those are the rules of hermeneutics i.e. theories of correct interpretation of biblical scripute. I have been to Bible college as well. We are both interpreting the scripture using the original text. You interpret the words one way and I another.You are so stuborn in your denial of this that you would argue the moon is made of green cheese. I am done with this.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

So now you are the only one who speaks for the voice of God? What arrogance!

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

So you admit you could be wrong in this whole debate? I am fallible I admit I could be wrong as well. I just look to where the evidence is pointing me. Can you do the same?

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

This is laughable how many different interpretations we can get just from one out verse (out of over 31,000 verses in the Bible). This proves my point about how difficult it is to determine the "true" meaning (whatever that would be) of religious scripture and how subjective this process truly is. Everyone has their own take, their own interpretation of what the words and passages mean, and nearly everyone who reads it thinks that their interpretation is the only correct one and everyone is interpreting the scripture incorrectly.That is the crux of the problem when you base your beliefs on unsubstantiatable religious text of antiquity without the burden of proof that is used in contexts such as modern courts of law and the scientific method and peer review process in the scientific community.Anyone else want to weigh in and tell us how would they interpet Matthew 7:13. So basically just on this topic alone we have probably about a half dozen different interpretations of this scripture both from Christians, agnostics and atheists. Anyone else want to give it a shot?Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

Thanks John 10:10. So is the broad gate/w leading to destruction referring to the path to hell? And the narrow gate to eternal life in heaven?

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

Does it really matter if we can't even trust the authenticity of the writings? How do we know how much was fabricated after the fact by Jewish and Christian scholars and canonical councils?Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

John 10:10,You prove my point very succinctly. Thanks for your assistance. ICANT you care to counter John 10:10's interpretation of this scripture? Obviously he interprets it as being the path to heaven/path to hell and Jesus as the gate like I expressed previously.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

I agree. My point was that Christians can't even determine amongst themselves who's interpretation of the scripture they think is right and who's they think is wrong. I understand it is an exercise in futility. I just like making trouble. Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

Well you guessed wrong.You have no clue what you are talking about Bertot. Follow the discussion and you will understand why I got involved in the first place instead of make irrelevant, unsubstantiated ad hominum attacks in a discussion you were never involved in.Actually, my entire point, as you can read in my posts, is that the Bible is self-contradictory including the multiple ways in which Christians can interpret the Bible differently and I was defending Cauldrons argument that according to the Bible God would spend numerous more people to hell than to heaven. That is why I spent time on it. In what way was I defending the Bible? I was demonstrating to ICANT that even most Christians would back up Cauldron's claim that according to the Bible (specifically Matthew 7:14) more people would be spending eternity in hell than in heaven.Yet, you spend time on this website defending against the atheism and the theory of evolution which you obviously disagree with. Why are you spending time on that? Um, no. And why are you on this site defending Christianity as being true? If this subconscience desire for Christianity to be right is true of me than by your logic the subconscience desire for atheism to be true should apply to you as well since you are so adamantly opposed to it and you spend a lot of your time attacking it. You can't have both ways. Stop with the psychoanalysis garbage and defend your position, otherwise shut up. I choose the third option, to make trouble .Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

Bertot, again you fail to see what the argument was about Bertot. Why is it I feel you have some sort of personal vendetta against me? What with all the personal attacks and all. BTW, I am joking.So let's analyze this shall we? It is apparantly ok, for you to use scientist's "quotes" and "apparant" inconsistencies against the the atheist's worldview (yes, I know atheists/agnostics/desits do not have one all-inclusiver worldview but for sake of argument let us pretend this to be true) but it is not ok for me to show inconsistencies in the Bible or your faith in the God of the Bible?If you can't handle my arguments, fine, I could care less. My whole point was that you and your friends think you are the only ones that know anything about religion or the Bible when many of us atheists, agnostics and deists have also had much religious experience and education but through logic, reason and study of the scientific evidence have determined the Christian faith to be on par with any other religious dogma out there, lacking moral and logical consistency and scientific support. I guess I will try to stick to the non-Biblical, science topics and let you and your religious friends banter over religious dogma and whose interpretation of the scripture is correct from now on. LOL, whatever floats your boat dude. And who made you the lord and judge of logical debate? Your a hoot. That was an attempt at humor which obviously failed on you. I debate on here to help shed light on the inconsistencies of both your belief as well as the book you believe in. I also use my intellect, logic and reason to filter through the bullshit and actually gain some pretty good useful debate tips, scientific reasoning and evidence and the like from people like Cavediver, Granny Magda, Brian, Straggler, Taz and others intelligent, scientifically minded people on here.Sounds like I touched a nerve with you and you can't handle this truth so I will cease this useless banter with you Bertot. Have a nice, Christian life.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

Ha, ha. I am almost laughing. Ok, and you are not being sarcastic when you attack my worldview? LOL. I have shown where the Bible is inconsistent in its moral stance i.e. the moral laws of the OT vice what Christians consider moral in todays modern society, what is illogical and inconsistent about that?You just don't like when I attack your belief system. Ok, get over it. Do your own work, I am not here to address your own conundrums. I would have to agree. LOL, that is funny. I need to send of for that degree.BTW, we should stop the mental sparring before Admin kicks us of into after-school detention.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

Onfire I applaud you. You hit the nail on the head by describing the tendancy for Christian fundamentalist's (as well as other religious fundamentalists) to use circular reasoning in justifying their beliefs and insisting that if you don't follow their blind faith that we will spend eternity in eternal torment in hell.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

Awesome. I live in southeast Virginia near Hampton Roads. Would have to juggle this between family and work.I am getting ready to go back to sea duty so will be pretty busy here in the next couple of months. You will probably see a lot less of me on EvC here in a month or two and I will probably be doing more lurking than active participating for the next 3-4 years onboard ship.Sorry about the onfire/onifre mix up. It is one of those things where your eyes see one thing and your brain thinks another.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan