EvC Forum: Why did God forgive our sins?

Email This Thread

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Author

Topic: Why did God forgive our sins?

Legend

Member (Idle past 5036 days)

Posts: 1226

From: Wales, UK

Joined: 05-07-2004

Normal Thread Display

(1)

Message 145 of 479 (471410)
06-16-2008 5:49 PM

Reply to: Message 138 by Hyroglyphx
06-15-2008 5:09 PM

Re: atonement, what atonement?

NJ writes:

Forgive me for psychoanalyzing the situation here, but you seem like someone genuinely angered by the concept of the Judeo-Christian God.

No, I've never been angered by a concept.

And yes, I do forgive you for your biased, condenscending and judgemental attempt at psycho-analysis.

N.B>Note to iano: see what I just did there? I forgave Nemesis. I didn't ask for anything back, I just forgave him. Isn't that cool? shame your god can't do that!

NJ writes:

To me, this bespeaks of something that happened to you perhaps when you are younger.

sorry to dissapoint but no, I had a pretty average and indistnctive ubringing.

NJ writes:

Perhaps you grew up believing the Bible, and when you grew older, you became more and more disenchanted and dejected.

I grew up believing the Bible. As I kept studying it more and more I started seeing it for what it really is.

NJ writes:

Because if you think about it, people that despise the notion of the Judeo-Christian ethic obviously would only do so because they feel hurt by it.

excuse me??! I can't believe you just said that. Is it also your opinion that people who despise the notion of the Nazi ethic only do so because they feel hurt by it ?!

NJ writes:

Perhaps they felt duped, lied to, and like a giant facade was revealed.

or perhaps they just saw it for what it really is. The Emperor's new clothes.

NJ writes:

Not believing in God alone, shoulould not rationally illicit such hostility, and indeed, could easily be seen as evidence either to the contrary, or evidence of cognitive dissonance.

I didn't exhibit any hostility in my postings on this thread. Intensity? perhaps. Desparation at the mental gymnastics some posters resort to in order to justify their faith? certainly. But no, no hostility here.

NJ writes:

But you might find, however, that crushing others beliefs, just because you had a personal problem with it, unnecessary. You are, of course, entitled to your opinions, but I wonder why such hostility? Can you shed some light on this?

Putting someone on the spot isn't an act of hostility. Everyone's entitiled to their faith but if one puts their views up on a public forum they have to be prepared for some critical deconstruction of them.

I appreciate that you find someone like me threatening to your worldview. To you, a Christian who gave up their faith could only have done so through insanity or some major childhood trauma. To you, it seems incomprehensible that someone who's actually felt the intense high -higher than any drug can give you- that comes with complete faith, can even think about abandoning it.

So you have to rationalise it. You have to tell yourself that Legend isn't pointing out what you spent your whole Christian life trying to avoid but he's just angry because he's lost his faith due to some event or some other.

If that makes you feel safer then keep believing it. Nothing could be further from the truth though.

"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"

This message is a reply to:
	Message 138 by Hyroglyphx, posted 06-15-2008 5:09 PM		Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 146 by Hyroglyphx, posted 06-16-2008 6:25 PM	Legend has not replied
	Message 148 by Hyroglyphx, posted 06-16-2008 6:31 PM	Legend has replied

Legend

Member (Idle past 5036 days)

Posts: 1226

From: Wales, UK

Joined: 05-07-2004

Normal Thread Display

(1)

Message 147 of 479 (471417)
06-16-2008 6:28 PM

Reply to: Message 141 by iano
06-15-2008 7:09 PM

the God-Father

Legend writes:

So, if I can follow your mental gordian knot (and I admit I'm struggling), you're suggesting that god waits until after the alleged rebellion in order to forgive?! is this correct?

iano writes:

The rebellion will be finished one way or the other so 'after' isn't precise enough a term

So god will hand-out forgiveness eventually...or maybe he's done it already....we just don't know.. god exists outside of time you see.

are you related to Nadia Komaneci in any way?

iano writes:

Forgiveness comes to those who God manages to squeeze a surrender out of. After they surrender the rebellion is over and forgiveness follows. It is worth noting that surrender is something achieved due to Gods action. God (in a manner of speaking) getting a grip and squeezing so hard that a person is compelled to yell "I surrender" is not that person paying so much as a red cent.

??!! to transfer this to my 'guy-playing-football-breaks-window' example I would have to chase after the window breaker with a baseball bat, beat him black & blue until he yells "I surrender" and then and only then would I forgive him!

have I already told you that you desribe god as a mafia henchman?

iano writes:

For those who manage to evade Gods grip? Their rebellion ends at their death - they fought to the very bitter end and there is no forgiveness available to them. Only Gods wrath.

what a cute way of saying 'if you don't believe in God he's going to break your legs'!

have I already told you that you desribe god as a mafia henchman?

iano writes:

Rebellion began with Adam. Forgiving Adam his sin could only occur after Adams rebellion was over. Perhaps that happened - if so, that's a matter for God and Adam. That doesn't resolve Adams offsprings problem however - anymore than my rebellion ending solves the problem for any future children I may have.

Triple back-flip with front aerial twisting layout!

what do the judges think? 10-10-10

well done! you don't make any sense but damn fine mental manoeuvring!

iano writes:

There is nothing to be 'put up' anything for the forgiveness. God gives it for free, there being nothing one has to do to get it

Oh goody! So noone has to accept Jesus as their saviour then! Phew that's a relief, I thought i was going to have to do that before I'm forgiven. Thanks for clearing that up.

"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"

This message is a reply to:
	Message 141 by iano, posted 06-15-2008 7:09 PM		iano has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 153 by iano, posted 06-17-2008 6:10 AM		Legend has not replied

Legend

Member (Idle past 5036 days)

Posts: 1226

From: Wales, UK

Joined: 05-07-2004

Normal Thread Display

Message 149 of 479 (471421)
06-16-2008 7:13 PM

Reply to: Message 142 by ICANT
06-15-2008 10:38 PM

Re: Interference

ICANT writes:

A person when is born is protected by God until they reach the age they know good and evil as the first man in the garden when he ate the fruit.

err. no..the first man in the garden didn't know good from evil until he ate the fruit (Gen 3:22). Not only God didn't protect him, he set him up for it! Don't you read your Bible ?

ICANT writes:

I said that job was delegated to the Church. Not the phoney churches.

ah yes, it's all making sense now. Ofcourse the church you believe in is the one true Church and all the others are phoney.

Legend writes:

When Jesus was asked what is the one thing that man needs to do in order to be saved

ICANT writes:

I do not find the word saved anywhere in that conservation.
I find where the man wanted to know what he had to do to inherit eternal life.

so how exactly is 'saved' different from 'gaining eternal life' in the context in which it was told ?

ICANT writes:

No one will inherit eternal life. It is a gift of God.

so you're saying that Jesus lied when he told the man what to do to gain eternal life!

"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"

This message is a reply to:
	Message 142 by ICANT, posted 06-15-2008 10:38 PM		ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 151 by ICANT, posted 06-16-2008 9:10 PM	Legend has replied
	Message 152 by ICANT, posted 06-16-2008 9:12 PM	Legend has not replied

Legend

Member (Idle past 5036 days)

Posts: 1226

From: Wales, UK

Joined: 05-07-2004

Normal Thread Display

(1)

Message 150 of 479 (471427)
06-16-2008 8:10 PM

Reply to: Message 148 by Hyroglyphx
06-16-2008 6:31 PM

Re: atonement, what atonement?

Legend writes:

sorry to dissapoint but no, I had a pretty average and indistnctive ubringing.

Nemesis Juggernaut writes:

Sometimes people repress these things, and aren't consciously aware of the their own psychological state.

hold on! now that you said this I remember being repeatedly sodomised by my sister's barbie doll's boyfriend (Ken) while being held down by a ruffian gang of Lego soldiers.

I mean, how else could I have come to the conclusion that the Bible is a collection of man-made myths and legends with a distinct religious and political bias?

Legend writes:

Did you feel duped and angry as if people had intentionally mislead you about something so serious?

Not at all, slightly disappointed perhaps but no more than when I realised that Santa Claus wasn't real.

Nemesis Juggernaut writes:

people that despise the notion of the Judeo-Christian ethic obviously would only do so because they feel hurt by it.

Legend writes:

Is it also your opinion that people who despise the notion of the Nazi ethic only do so because they feel hurt by it?!

Nemesis Juggernaut writes:

There is a central difference here. Nazi's existed, and you claim that God does not. If God doesn't exist then surely you can't be upset with that which does not exist. That would be irrational.

No, whether God/Nazism existed or not is irrelevant to this argument. You claimed that the only reason people can despise a doctrine is if they've been hurt by it. So I'm asking : Are people who despise Nazism (or any other doctrine) only doing so because they've been hurt by it ?

Nemesis Juggernaut writes:

Who is the Emperor?

it's a well-known fairy tale. In short, it's about the people wanting to believe that the Emperor's wearing nice clothers while in reality he's naked. When a little boy naively points that out, they all realise the extent of their self-delusion. Ring any bells ?

Nemesis Juggernaut writes:

Far be it from me to belabor the obvious, but there are a lot of people that get their jollies by making others feel inferior. If this is not you, then let it roll off your back like water on a duck's feathers.

..wooosh..

Nemesis Juggernaut writes:

I don't have much of a worldview to begin with that it might be threatened in the first place.

you don't have a worldview?! I thought you were a Christian!

Nemesis Juggernaut writes:

What is bad, in my estimation, is trying to bring everyone down with you because you had a bad experience. I think that's more than just a little mean-spirited.

I could argue that I'm trying to drag everyone up with me but the irony would probably be lost on you.

Nemesis Juggernaut writes:

There just seems to be a general hostility in you. If I am mistaken, then I apologize

Your mistake is forgiven.

[Psst...iano... I did it again!]

Nemesis Juggernaut writes:

You seem to be fascinated with the Judo-Christian faith in an unhealthy way. For a non-believer I find this fascination to be a little disturbing

aren't you fascinated by the fact that 50 million people believed that Hitler was a courageous visionary who was working for their good? If yes, does it mean you're a closet-Nazi?

Mass self-delusion is almost always a fascinating thing.

Nemesis Juggernaut writes:

When I see Richard Dawkins, I don't see a man with a healthy fascination. ....
Common sense would then dictate that he feels particularly threatened by it, and has a need in his mind to conquer these inner demons.

I can't speak for Richard Dawkins but I'm sure his motivation is the same as mine:

If Christians (or any other religion) kept their faith in their houses and in their churches there would be no need for anyone to write, say or do anything against it.

But when those Christians attempt to change other people's lives based on their own superstitions and dogma then some people have no choice but to point out the narrow-minded absurdity of those views.

So don't flatter yourself: Dawkins doesn't secretly believe in your god any more than he secretly believes in Santa Claus. He's just very aware that 8-year old kids won't attempt to stop the search for Alzheimer's or try to control what he reads and listens to or what he teaches his kids. Christians will and do so.

This is why he spends so much time and effort debunking Christianity and no time debunking Santa Claus.

is that clearer now?

"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"

This message is a reply to:
	Message 148 by Hyroglyphx, posted 06-16-2008 6:31 PM		Hyroglyphx has not replied

Legend

Member (Idle past 5036 days)

Posts: 1226

From: Wales, UK

Joined: 05-07-2004

Normal Thread Display

Message 154 of 479 (471619)
06-17-2008 3:52 PM

Reply to: Message 151 by ICANT
06-16-2008 9:10 PM

Re: Interference

Legend writes:

so you're saying that Jesus lied when he told the man what to do to gain eternal life!

ICANT writes:

Had the man been able to do what Jesus said I am sure He would have honored his Word.

are you implying that Jesus told the man to love god and his neighbour knowing full well that he couldn't do it?

let's leave aside the fact that this would make Jesus an evil, teasing so and so for a while. Why then wouldn't Jesus tell the man what he could do, i.e. to accept him as his saviour?

ICANT writes:

But people had been trying to inherit eternal life for several thousand years and was not able to do so.

says who? and who would they inherit from?

"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"

This message is a reply to:
	Message 151 by ICANT, posted 06-16-2008 9:10 PM		ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 155 by ICANT, posted 06-17-2008 7:56 PM		Legend has replied

Legend

Member (Idle past 5036 days)

Posts: 1226

From: Wales, UK

Joined: 05-07-2004

Normal Thread Display

Message 156 of 479 (471781)
06-18-2008 7:31 AM

Reply to: Message 155 by ICANT
06-17-2008 7:56 PM

Re: Interference

Legend writes:

Why then wouldn't Jesus tell the man what he could do, i.e. to accept him as his saviour?

ICANT writes:

That is not what he wanted. He wanted to inherit eternal life.

what are you on about? The man asked Jesus what to do in order to gain eternal life!

Jesus told him to love God and love his neighbour as himself.
Are you saying that this is not the way to gain eternal life, i.e. Jesus lied?
Are you saying that Jesus told him what to do knowing full well that he couldn't do it, i.e. Jesus intentionally misled him?
Are you saying that there's nothing one can do to gain eternal life, i.e. Jesus lied?

Just what exactly are you saying?!

ICANT writes:

Eternal life is a free gift. You can't buy it or earn it.

So when Jesus tell the man what to do to earn it, he's lying, according to you.

ICANT writes:

But I am sure if he could have met the qualifications Jesus put to him he would have honored His Word.

So you're saying that eternal life is a free gift but Jesus setup some more conditions specifically for this man. Was he teasing him or something?

You keep contradicting yourself and the Bible. I don't think you know what you believe in. You just want to believe in something, that's all.

"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"

This message is a reply to:
	Message 155 by ICANT, posted 06-17-2008 7:56 PM		ICANT has not replied

Legend

Member (Idle past 5036 days)

Posts: 1226

From: Wales, UK

Joined: 05-07-2004

Normal Thread Display

Message 160 of 479 (472249)
06-21-2008 12:20 PM

*bump* for ICANT

Legend writes:

Why then wouldn't Jesus tell the man what he could do, i.e. to accept him as his saviour?

ICANT writes:

That is not what he wanted. He wanted to inherit eternal life.

To which I replied:

quote:
The man asked Jesus what to do in order to gain eternal life!

Jesus told him to love God and love his neighbour as himself.
Are you saying that this is not the way to gain eternal life, i.e. Jesus lied?
Are you saying that Jesus told him what to do knowing full well that he couldn't do it, i.e. Jesus intentionally misled him?
Are you saying that there's nothing one can do to gain eternal life, i.e. Jesus lied?

Just what exactly are you saying?!

well, do you believe in Jesus or not?

"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"

Replies to this message:
	Message 161 by Legend, posted 06-29-2008 8:11 AM	Legend has not replied
	Message 162 by Phat, posted 08-05-2008 4:06 PM	Legend has replied

Legend

Member (Idle past 5036 days)

Posts: 1226

From: Wales, UK

Joined: 05-07-2004

Normal Thread Display

Message 161 of 479 (473439)
06-29-2008 8:11 AM

Reply to: Message 160 by Legend
06-21-2008 12:20 PM

Re: *bump* for ICANT

your reluctance to reply leads me to conclude that despite calling yourself a Christian you don't really accept what Jesus said. Another Christian in name only.

"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"

This message is a reply to:
	Message 160 by Legend, posted 06-21-2008 12:20 PM		Legend has not replied

Legend

Member (Idle past 5036 days)

Posts: 1226

From: Wales, UK

Joined: 05-07-2004

Normal Thread Display

Message 164 of 479 (477708)
08-06-2008 6:22 PM

Reply to: Message 162 by Phat
08-05-2008 4:06 PM

Re: Advocate of personal responsibility

Hi Phat,

I have to say I agree with iano in Message 163. It's either grace or works. Paul advocated grace through faith, Jesus advocated works. The third position you mentioned is more of an agnostic/atheist position.

I always found it interesting when Christians try to shoehorn the philosophy of the originator of their religion into that of its founder.

what's your take on this?

"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"

This message is a reply to:
	Message 162 by Phat, posted 08-05-2008 4:06 PM		Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 165 by Phat, posted 08-07-2008 6:09 AM	Legend has replied
	Message 166 by iano, posted 08-07-2008 6:24 AM	Legend has replied

Legend

Member (Idle past 5036 days)

Posts: 1226

From: Wales, UK

Joined: 05-07-2004

Normal Thread Display

(1)

Message 167 of 479 (477786)
08-07-2008 5:32 PM

Reply to: Message 165 by Phat
08-07-2008 6:09 AM

Re: Advocate of personal responsibility

For one thing, how seriously should we take Paul/Saul?

as seriously as we can take someone who didn't know Jesus and then suddenly started teaching things that Jesus didn't deem important enough or even plainly contradicted.

On what does one base their belief?

on whatever fits in with the world around us, just like we do with every other aspect of our life.

I myself personally believe that God does interact and commune through humans...many of whom are not religious. Again, this is a faith/belief issue and cannot be provable one way or another.

And that's fair enough, I respect that and am not going to argue against that. I only take issue with the dogmatic lot who proclaim that God can be found in the Bible and if you don't find him after you read it it's because you 'didn't read it with an open mind'.

IF Christians who did have the Holy Spirit were thus ambassadors of WOG, why would they so often be caught acting so foolishly and be so resistant to scientific logic and secular rationality?

See, if you replace "Holy Spirit" with "wilfull igonorance" or "dogmatic pig-headedness" it kind of makes sense!

"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"

This message is a reply to:
	Message 165 by Phat, posted 08-07-2008 6:09 AM		Phat has seen this message but not replied

Legend

Member (Idle past 5036 days)

Posts: 1226

From: Wales, UK

Joined: 05-07-2004

Normal Thread Display

Message 168 of 479 (477787)
08-07-2008 5:37 PM

Reply to: Message 166 by iano
08-07-2008 6:24 AM

Re: Advocate of personal responsibility

a new word in my vocabulary - thank you! Although.... your link claims the dovetail is

quote:
Noted for its resistance to being pulled apart.

The exact opposite of Christianity then!

"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"

This message is a reply to:
	Message 166 by iano, posted 08-07-2008 6:24 AM		iano has not replied

Date format: mm-dd-yyyy

Timezone: ET (US)

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Do Nothing Button

4 online now:	Omnivorous, PaulK, Tangle, Theodoric
Newest Member:	ChatGPT
Post Volume:	Total: 916,909 Year: 4,166/9,624 Month: 1,037/974 Week: 364/286 Day: 7/13 Hour: 2/2