A puzzling thing about traditional religion

^^^^ you didn't pay attention, schrafinator... this is exactly what we were talking about in the 'knowledge' thread... i can see no hint here of a person who is sincerely seeking to understand something, i see an evidentialist posturing

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:
^^^^ you didn't pay attention, schrafinator... this is exactly what we were talking about in the 'knowledge' thread... i can see no hint here of a person who is sincerely seeking to understand something, i see an evidentialist posturing

---

Schraf is positing what I call the God-acts-like-two-year-old-spoiled-brat hypothesis. This subject has occupied the lives of countless theologians so I hardly think it can be classed as mere posturing.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by John:

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:
^^^^ you didn't pay attention, schrafinator... this is exactly what we were talking about in the 'knowledge' thread... i can see no hint here of a person who is sincerely seeking to understand something, i see an evidentialist posturing

---

​

Schraf is positing what I call the God-acts-like-two-year-old-spoiled-brat hypothesis. This subject has occupied the lives of countless theologians so I hardly think it can be classed as mere posturing.

​

---

in the sense that it either ignored or misstated chara's post, and mine...

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:
in the sense that it either ignored or misstated chara's post, and mine...

---

To me, it doesn't look like a misstatement of your or chara's posts, but more of a derivation of them. I don't think that Schraf is trying to misrepresent but to state some unstated implications. I had many of the same thoughts when reading your posts.Can you explain to me how this is a misstatement?------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

Forgiven, the reason that Obsidian's comments seem like postering is that Christianity comes with such a boatload of assumptions that it is very easy to tear apart:Here's just a few of the assumptions:
1. There is a God
2. This God has been humanized in the form of Jesus
3. This God consists of 3 persons who are also one God.
4. There is such a thing as "sin."
5. There is such a thing as free will and that it can co-exist with an all-powerful God.
6. That the most important topic in the universe is morality. (Why morality? What couldn't God be more interested in aesthetics, for example? Remember what Neitszche said? "The only justification for the universe is an aesthetic justification.")
7. That we have something called a "soul."
8. That there is an afterlife.And on and on. That's what makes it hard not to mock it or to seem to be mocking it unless one shares some of those assumptions.

quote:

---

Originally posted by robinrohan:
Forgiven, the reason that Obsidian's comments seem like postering is that Christianity comes with such a boatload of assumptions that it is very easy to tear apart:

​

Here's just a few of the assumptions:
1. There is a God
2. This God has been humanized in the form of Jesus
3. This God consists of 3 persons who are also one God.
4. There is such a thing as "sin."
5. There is such a thing as free will and that it can co-exist with an all-powerful God.
6. That the most important topic in the universe is morality. (Why morality? What couldn't God be more interested in aesthetics, for example? Remember what Neitszche said? "The only justification for the universe is an aesthetic justification.")
7. That we have something called a "soul."
8. That there is an afterlife.

​

And on and on. That's what makes it hard not to mock it or to seem to be mocking it unless one shares some of those assumptions.

---

Very concise. Good show....------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Orginally posted by Chara:
This is not unlike our relationship with our earthly fathers. When we go against our earthly father, our relationship is broken. We are still his child, but lets face it, the quality of the relationship isn't there.

---

[QUOTE]Originally posted by schrafinator:
[b]So, unless we acheive this (by definition) unatainable perfection, God is unhappy with us.Talk about a dysfunctional relationship.[/quote][/b]I want to put on emphasis on the last phrase of my sentence: the quality of that relationship isn't there. I think schraf that you can agree that in a relationship when someone has done something that goes against the other person, the relationship is altered. Even if the topic doesn't come up in conversation, or argument , its still there between us. That is what I was trying to get across when I made the above statement. God doesn't want ANYTHING to hinder our relationship with Him.God is not so much "unhappy" with us, as unhappy with the broken relationship.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chara:
His love is governed by this holiness and our relationship with Him is broken when we do anything that does not measure up to this holiness.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by schrafinator:
So unless we are perfect, which God clearly did not create us to be, we break our relationship with him? This seems like a no-win proposition.

---

Now this statement is ABSOLUTELY true (except for the part about God not creating us to be perfect - but we can talk about that later). When we try to make the bridge in the relationship, we can't. It's impossible for us. But God (one of my favorite phrases in the Bible, btw) can and did .... through what Jesus did here on earth. The gift is yours, will you open it?P.S. Haven't forgotten or ignored your other comments ...

Freaky,
Lemme try this quote thing...

quote:

---

God gave us this free will we so love and cherish, this same free will (which is in and of itself a good thing), is perverted by some men and they do terrible things and some of them even have the nerve to do it in his name. Note all men pervert this free will. Our pride and greed leave behind us trails of destruction we don't even see! A seemingly tiny insugnificant decision on your part may cause another man serious grief, that you don't even see! However it was still your action/decision that caused this. You have sinned and you didn't even know it. So busy with me me me, (because we abuse this gift of free will) that you don't even know you are damaging others

---

So what I understand from this is, all men sin... So, no matter what good I do in the world to help my fellow man, my sin is accumulated throughout my entire life and held against me because I am tainted in the eyes of God. There is no balance of good works vs sin, only the bad is considered at the Pearly Gates. So theorectically, I could only get to heaven without Jesus if I died as a newborn babe (after bapistism?). But my next question is.... Was Jesus a man or God? If Jesus was a man, wasn't he tainted as well? because all men sin. Could Jesus have gone to hell for us? Since its kinda weird for him to accept himself into his heart as the only path to his father.... If Jesus was God, then its god who sacrifices himself so he can accept us into heaven.... Its just seems horribly convuluted... I mean its GOD, all omnipotent being
I hope I don't sound like I am posturing...
Obsidian

Forgiven,
Thank you for the info on the history of the sacrifice, it was something I hadn't heard before and I appreciate it.
Lemme see if I get the gist of it, the yearly lamb sacrifice was in essence replaced by Jesus as an eternal sacrifice. So at his death the lamb sacrifices could be stopped. If the lamb sacrifices were absolving the sins in the first place, why the need for Jesus to come down and become the new Lamb?Ok I understand the idea of the eternal sacrifice now and that ...

quote:

---

his righteousness, his standing with God, was given to me, to you, to her, to all who believe... that means, when God looks at me he doesn't see *me*... he doesn't see my stained soul, Jesus took that, Jesus assumed responsibility for all my sins... God sees the righteousness of Christ when he looks at me, because Jesus transferred that righteousness to me...

---

Moving on a little, schraf brought up a good point. The idea that free will causes men to sin. It initially seems like God creates this unattainable standard of perfection for us by giving us free will. The usual reply to this is that God didn't want little automatons running around because we would never show him love without free will/sin. Ok, neglecting the fact that everything I do or don't do for mankind is considered sinful, wouldn't instilling in our very being a set of moral codes (ie do not murder) that cause psychological pain if violated still allow the use of free will (ie I choose not to believe in God) but keep the amount of murders rapes and general evil down in the world? I accept the fact that there would still be sin, I mean, my not giving change to a bum or holding the door open for someone can be considered sins since it 'hurts' my fellow man.And regarding the last part of the post....

quote:

---

Jesus lived such a life, guiltless and spotless and without sin.. only such a person could assume another's guilt, only a person who didn't have his own debt to pay... if death is the penalty for sin, and had Jesus any sin of his own, his death would only pay for his sin... not mine, not yours, not hers... but one life for all who sinned? is that justice? it is when that life is God very God... it is when the righteousness exchanged for the sins is greater than the sum total of all sins... it is when it's the perfect nature of God.

---

So if anyone, be it murderer, rapist, or just a decent man, accepts Jesus into themselves they get to go to Heaven? This just seems wrong to me. Also, shouldn't we be 'judged' at the Pearly Gates? It just seems like Jesus is a VIP pass into heaven, with no bouncer at the door, no matter what you have done in the past.Again, I hope I am not posturing,
Obsidian

quote:

---

Originally posted by John:

quote:

---

Originally posted by forgiven:
in the sense that it either ignored or misstated chara's post, and mine...

---

​

To me, it doesn't look like a misstatement of your or chara's posts, but more of a derivation of them. I don't think that Schraf is trying to misrepresent but to state some unstated implications. I had many of the same thoughts when reading your posts.

​

Can you explain to me how this is a misstatement?

---

ok, my apologies... maybe "misunderstood" should have been used

obsidian, please forgive my "posturing" remark, it was bad form

quote:

---

Originally posted by obsidian:
Forgiven,
Thank you for the info on the history of the sacrifice, it was something I hadn't heard before and I appreciate it.
Lemme see if I get the gist of it, the yearly lamb sacrifice was in essence replaced by Jesus as an eternal sacrifice. So at his death the lamb sacrifices could be stopped. If the lamb sacrifices were absolving the sins in the first place, why the need for Jesus to come down and become the new Lamb?

---

that's the whole point, the blood of goats and sheep and cattle never could take away sin... they could only cover it... this was signified inside the holy of holies... the ark of the covenant was designed in such a way that the blood poured on top of it hid from God's eyes the sins of his people... the whole ritual was never given to the jews to take away sin, merely to show the future necessity of Messiah who *would* take away sin... the blood of Jesus did what the blood of animals couldn't, it washed away our sins, it didn't simply cover them

quote:

---

Moving on a little, schraf brought up a good point. The idea that free will causes men to sin. It initially seems like God creates this unattainable standard of perfection for us by giving us free will. The usual reply to this is that God didn't want little automatons running around because we would never show him love without free will/sin. Ok, neglecting the fact that everything I do or don't do for mankind is considered sinful, wouldn't instilling in our very being a set of moral codes (ie do not murder) that cause psychological pain if violated still allow the use of free will (ie I choose not to believe in God) but keep the amount of murders rapes and general evil down in the world? I accept the fact that there would still be sin, I mean, my not giving change to a bum or holding the door open for someone can be considered sins since it 'hurts' my fellow man.

---

i happen to believe (given a properly functioning mind) God *did* do that for us.. the bible says he gave us an inner testimony of him and his nature, as well as an outer (creation)... the "unattainable standard" reference is correct... it is unattainable, God knew this, and God did something about it... now we have to simply trust in him, we simply have to believe... as the bible says, "..hath not God said?" [quote] And regarding the last part of the post....

quote:

---

Jesus lived such a life, guiltless and spotless and without sin.. only such a person could assume another's guilt, only a person who didn't have his own debt to pay... if death is the penalty for sin, and had Jesus any sin of his own, his death would only pay for his sin... not mine, not yours, not hers... but one life for all who sinned? is that justice? it is when that life is God very God... it is when the righteousness exchanged for the sins is greater than the sum total of all sins... it is when it's the perfect nature of God.

---

So if anyone, be it murderer, rapist, or just a decent man, accepts Jesus into themselves they get to go to Heaven? This just seems wrong to me. Also, shouldn't we be 'judged' at the Pearly Gates? It just seems like Jesus is a VIP pass into heaven, with no bouncer at the door, no matter what you have done in the past.Again, I hope I am not posturing,
Obsidian[/B][/QUOTE]first of all, the "no matter what you have done in the past" thing is true... the problem is, we all think the next gal's sins are greater than our own... sin is sin, and sometimes it's hard for us to understand that... so a murderer, for example, has sinned against God's holy nature... but so has a liar, so has a thief, so has a slanderer... we categorize sins because there seems to be a need to say "see? i'm better than irma or john or zack or gloria"...Jesus answered you also, your part about "this just seems wrong to me..." here's kinda how he put it...a man was planting a field and needed some help... early one morning he went to a place where men gathered... he offered 50 bucks each for the day, to any who would work... some came with him at the time... couple hours later a few said, "man we shoulda gone, i know i could use the dough" so a few more went and worked the rest of the day... later, toward evening, a couple more said, "we shoulda gone too" and they went to the field and worked the rest of the dayat the end of the day the owner of the field called them all together and paid each 50 bucks... the ones who came in the morning received the same as the ones who arrived in the evening... they complained, "hey!! we got here early and worked all day... why do these stragglers deserve the same pay we get?"the owner said, "it has nothing to do with who deserves what... did i not promise you 50 bucks for the day? have i not paid you? what is it to you what i do with what's mine? the money i paid the others, isn't it mine to do with what i want?"so you see, salvation is of the Lord, it's only by his grace that any are saved... he freely gives to all who believe, and since salvation is of the Lord who are we to say we're more deserving than another? isn't it his to do with as he chooses?

Forgiven

quote:

---

so you see, salvation is of the Lord, it's only by his grace that any are saved... he freely gives to all who believe, and since salvation is of the Lord who are we to say we're more deserving than another? isn't it his to do with as he chooses?

---

Let me get something clarified.... does Jesus=God=Lord? or is Jesus the Son of God?Ok, if salvation is of the Lord, I do understand that it is his to give freely... but by absolving our sins through Jesus... wiping the slate clean as it were.... we are not presenting ourselves to the Lord as were truly are. We are presenting a cleaned up version of ourselves. His judgement/grace on our soul is not based on the truth. Its like we are lying/falsifying ourselves through Jesus in order to attain heaven and salvation. Sin is universal, everyone has it, shouldn't God grant us salvation because he knows we are imperfect? The whole thing with Jesus is like pulling the wool (Lambs wool ;-)) over Gods eyes just so someone can get the big eternal payoff in the end.Ok, going off on a little tangent here. The idea of sin. IF you believe you have a soul and that a soul is eternal, how can the souls brief stay in the body taint it so much? Do we carry sin after we leave our body like a piece of luggage or does it actually rip holes in the soul? If Gods main goal is for us to be with him for eternity, why allow sin to taint us while passing through the mortal coil? A soul should be above all that.
I dunno, I don't think this was really thought out to well, but I wanted to give a different perspective, I should really get back to working on this 10-30 pg paper I have to write.I look forward to your answers
Obsidian

I also wanted to bring up another point...
The main goal of believing in Jesus is to acheive salvation and thus enter into an eternal relationship with God, how can we ever hope to accomplish this with the basic properties that we have assigned to God... ie that he is omniscient, omnipotent, and omibenevolent. Since God existed before and outside of time, he is essentially infinite. How can we finite beings, who are governed by time and space, ever gain a relationship with a such a being? I mean, we live a according to a certain set of rules (time) and finiteness (our bodies and souls) that God established, but God is outside of those rules. Do you believe we creatures can even attain a relationship, and how? It would be like mixing oil and water.If our souls are converted into timeless, infinite beings (timeless is not something I can even comprehend to be honest. Its seems like its always living today and having no yesterday or tomorrow. just weird) Do we thus become more godly when we die? I mean that is one of the main ideas of Christianity, if you don't believe, you will be punished in hell for eternity... well for timeless beings thats nothing cause there is no concept of time. So if we are not converted into timeless beings how can we enter into a relationship with God. It would seem like you are being friends with a tornado.... completely surrounded yet apart at the same time just because of our finiteness.Obsidian

quote:

---

Originally posted by obsidian:

​

Let me get something clarified.... does Jesus=God=Lord? or is Jesus the Son of God?

---

ok, this is the doctrine of the trinity and it's probably the hardest doctrine of them all to understand... it deserves more time than i have at the moment, but i'll do my best to get back to it, ok? in the meantime, yes Jesus is God, Lord of all, and Jesus is the Son of God

quote:

---

Ok, if salvation is of the Lord, I do understand that it is his to give freely... but by absolving our sins through Jesus... wiping the slate clean as it were.... we are not presenting ourselves to the Lord as were truly are.

---

well, that isn't entirely the way it works, maybe i wasn't clear on it... Jesus *took* our sins, on the cross... the moment we believe he *gives* us his righteousness... it is ours, ok? we are called "saints" in the n.t. for that very reason... at this moment and forever more i am identified with Christ, i'm adopted into God's family, with the same rights of any family member... so, because of Jesus and for his sake, i *am* presenting myself to God as i am... but i'm only as i am because of Jesus... don't underestimate the power of faith, Jesus spoke to its power

quote:

---

We are presenting a cleaned up version of ourselves. His judgement/grace on our soul is not based on the truth. Its like we are lying/falsifying ourselves through Jesus in order to attain heaven and salvation. Sin is universal, everyone has it, shouldn't God grant us salvation because he knows we are imperfect? The whole thing with Jesus is like pulling the wool (Lambs wool ;-)) over Gods eyes just so someone can get the big eternal payoff in the end.

---

we are, now, who we are because of God's grace and our faith (belief, trust) that he accepts us that way... go back to the o.t. sacrifice on yom kippor... for the sacrifice to actually cover a jew's sin, that person had to believe it did... for us to be saints, for us to be children of God, we have to believe it... thus sayeth the Lord, thus it is

quote:

---

Ok, going off on a little tangent here. The idea of sin. IF you believe you have a soul and that a soul is eternal, how can the souls brief stay in the body taint it so much? Do we carry sin after we leave our body like a piece of luggage or does it actually rip holes in the soul? If Gods main goal is for us to be with him for eternity, why allow sin to taint us while passing through the mortal coil? A soul should be above all that.

---

the word "sin" means missing the mark... the 'mark' is God's holy nature... it's not a culmative thing, one sin taints the soul... the blood of Jesus and your faith are the things missing from the above, and the power of each... his blood has the power to make new that which is old, to cleanse that which is soiled, to wash all signs of sin from both your soul and your conciousness, to restore your soul to a perfect, sinless state... the old song "there's pow'r in the blood" says it all... there *is* power, wonderful, awe-inspiring power, in the blood of Christ... all we have to do is trust God that this is so... it's all he's ever wanted, simply for us to trust him

quote:

---

I also wanted to bring up another point...
The main goal of believing in Jesus is to acheive salvation and thus enter into an eternal relationship with God, how can we ever hope to accomplish this with the basic properties that we have assigned to God... ie that he is omniscient, omnipotent, and omibenevolent. Since God existed before and outside of time, he is essentially infinite. How can we finite beings, who are governed by time and space, ever gain a relationship with a such a being? I mean, we live a according to a certain set of rules (time) and finiteness (our bodies and souls) that God established, but God is outside of those rules. Do you believe we creatures can even attain a relationship, and how? It would be like mixing oil and water.

---

First eternal salvation is the end result, yes but our goal now knowing and believing, loving Jesus Christ (who is son of God and God. "if you have seen me you have seen the Father")is to serve God. As i pointed out before man's way of pride and greed leaves a trail of destruction behind him, no matter how hard you try in and of yourself to "do good for your fellow man". Even these good works turn against you somewhere and become counted sins. You cannot see the chain of effect your life has on others (God's other creations). God can! and by having a relationship with him now we can know his will in our lives and when we serve and follow him (we see that in our example of Jesus) he instructs our ways to leave a trail of good fruits. "you will know them by their fruits" Not to say that belief of Jesus brings us to perfection but it is a work started (which God promises to finish). Only with a relationship with God can we produce fruit. Why keep a fruitless branch?------------------
saved by grace