Politcally Correct Christ

You are forgetting one very important thing. I am already saved.When you are saved from the Myth of Christ the threats He makes are null and void.Brian.

Really nice of the guy.When I compare the Old Testament texts that refer to Yahweh's interactions with the world with those of other ANE texts, it appears that Yahweh is a bit, to be PC, slow, He doesn't appear to be playing with a full deck. Now if Jesus is giving us two commandements to follow that are impossible to folow then either He is as dense as Yahweh, or is a bit of a sadist.If the commandments are impossible to follow, and people know this, then it is pointless having them.Brian.

I'd say that old racist and bigot William Albright demands a lot of respect for his work. This is more a historical apologetic than a theological one.Havent read Simon Greenleaf.Brian.

iano But this fails to answer the question of why God would instill lust within people in the first place. Why would he not make the sexual act something more progressive and not ,at times, overwhelming of good judgement? Yet the laws ,if put in place by a God to test humans, should fail to prevent humans from following the impulses that the laws are supposed to limit, then failing to follow them is a response of the nature that the God allowed us to have. He cannot hold responsible humans who had no part in the creation of those impulses that he himself instilled.
This is not a reasonable response to the facts of human existence. But why the punishment for following free will {which is another topic related to this} when we cannot do other than follow the choices as a consequence of who we are? Any law that is in place can be broken of course but if we are created[/i] then why are we given the capability of breaking the laws? If we had a choice to be able to choose a life where we did no harm to anyone ,while cognizant of all the harmful ramifications of the action we might make, would anyone ever do so? I think not. It is because we have insufficient knowledge and/or are not mature enough { a responsibilty that would fall to God I might add } or overcome with emotional interactions that we do break laws and do harm others.
Either way I assert that the responsibilty for the capability would lay with a creator God since the whole ball of wax is ,supposedly his doing in the first place. Not at all. To be human is to realize that you likely cannot avoid harm or break law throughout your life since laws are man made and socially enforced. Being human is to realize that mistakes are not a fault but a consequence of who we are, which is not something that reduces to mere black and white rules of operation.Tey are multi level,multi dimensional and human. For every law in place I can think of situations in which the law is not necessarily correct as a stricture on behaviour.Whether a person agrees or not can only be based on the values of the individual themselves. It could also be , as I suspect, that God simply does not exist and that we take the actions we do based on the evolved social structures and interactions with others. That some people believe that there is a God is far easier answered by this assumption than the assumption that God is somehow playing favorites with "applied conviction" as you so handily have worded it. Indeed.

Your bright enough so see if you get it in one.1. Jesus tells a man "These things you must do if you want to avoid hell". A man becomes convinced he is telling the truth.2. A man finds he cannot do what Jesus said he must do if he wants to get avoid hell/get to heaven. He finds the bar to high to jump. He becomes convinced of this too.What should the reaction of a man be who becomes fully convinced of both of these things? I'll give you a hint. Its a 4 letter exclaimation that starts with the letter 'S'edit: clarify re: a man being convinced of these thingsEdited by iano, : No reason given.

He threatens me not one jot. How can someone who has eternal life and one which is blissful feel threatened in any way?

Sing?

He threatens you with Hell if you don't do as He says.Conditional love.Love me and folow everything I say, or I will put your ass in the Eternal Lake of Fire forever.What a nice guy.Brian.

"Au cointreu" as Delboy would say. There is very much a point. Have any luck with that 4 letter word?

Nope. There is an 'i' in it too though...Edited by iano, : No reason given.

Doh! No he doesn't. I sin every day and I'm not threatened with hell.

Swim?

I didn't say that sinners are threatened with Hell.I said if you do not do as Jesus asks you to do then you go to Hell.This is a threat, follow me or go to Hell. It isn't difficult to understand.That's the conditional love of Christ, the jealous God.Brian.

That kinda shoots a hole in the foot of knowledge of good and evil.Are you suggesting that rather than the black/white awareness of good/evil which we are innately aware of...rather...there is just an acknowledgement (a rather gray one) of humanity as just being "human"???Sounds like a great ploy by a defense attorney to get a murderer off the hook!

So are you suggesting that Christ(If He exists ) should allow us to do whatever we want? Lets go with your hypothesis for a moment. (Allow me to get a bit Jar-esque) IF God sent His Son, who was and is eternal..(as is God), to earth as a witness to the absolute and unconditional love of God, then DOES everyone have to acknowledge this authority and law? IF God accepted everyone---those who believe and those who mock---then does that make Gods love unconditional?? In order to make the whole thing work, DO people have to acknowledge God at some point?If not, would it be unconditional love for God to allow the unbelievers to continue to exist in their own comfort zone?