My Beliefs- GDR

How do you know otherwise?There might be thousands of bears prowling the streets if it wasn't for the Bear Patrol.

OK. So it's not true, then, that "only the sacrifice of the Son of God can purge sin". Apparently killing goats also works. So, remind me what the Atonement was for again? Did Jesus die to save us from our sins, or just to save us money that we'd otherwise have spent on goats? I mean, it's jolly decent of him either way.

I see the best you can do is simply to continue lying. Whenever someone points out that you are marketing a vile, evil and immoral god your response is to lie and misrepresent what other people have posted.How pitiful.

Sorry if I was not clear, let me try again:Animal sacrifices in themselves cannot purge sin, but in the light of the promise of the Messiah yet to come, whose sacrifice can and did purge sin when He did appear, God accepted the animal sacrifices as atonement for the people's sins.

Excuse me, but your judgment of God as vile evil and immoral was apparently based on my saying that He judges sin, therefore my conclusion that you object to the punishment of sin is correct.

Hi Faith, Admittedly, I've not been following all of this discussion, but I rather think that you have misinterpreted people here. It's not so much that people don't want God to punish sin, it's more that we'd prefer that he didn't punish innocents for other people's sins.Now you may think that a tornado in the face is a perfectly appropriate punishment for lying. Personally, I'd call it a bit of an over-reaction, but that's just me I guess. But let's assume that a lethal tornado is an ideal punishment for the sin of telling porkies; why should everyone else pay for the liar's sin? Why should nearby innocents die from that disaster? Why should children die? Why should Christians die? Why should animals die? I mean, you can't blame a woodchuck for humanity's sins, it's only a woodchuck. It's hardly fair to hold it responsible for the human misconduct.It seems clear to me that if God is using disasters as a punishment for sin, then he is either engaging in a particularly unpleasant form of collective punishment, or he just has really lousy aim.Mutate and Survive

I don't understand the distinction you are making here.Animal sacrifices are accepted by God as atonement for sin. How is that different from the sacrifice of Jesus as atonement of sin?What's the difference?

And so you once again respond by misrepresenting what I wrote.There is a pattern here Faith; you either are unable to actually read what is written or willfully misread what is written.In Message 467 YOU said: to which I replied in Message 468
It is not judgement of sin I responded to but rather your description of the god you try to market, an inept bumbler who responds to sin (an area where a god might be relevant) and crimes (an area where a god is totally irrelevant) by using disasters and calamities, tools that indiscriminately punish both the sinner and the sinless, the criminal and the innocent.We see the same affliction when you are discussing the Bible stories, posting what others said some passage means instead of what the passage actually says.

I'd rather he not interfere at all. Don't punish anyone. We have our own laws that deal with that. Even the death penalty. So no need for god to send world wide floods and genocide of that nature.- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.

Hi Oni,I hear you and, for the most part, I agree. It would be nice if God could treat us like adults and let us run our own affairs. He's apparently going to judge us after we die, so I don't see why he can't just leave it at that. To punish before and after death seems like gilding the lilly.On the other hand, if God did punish sinners - and by that I mean only punish sinners, as opposed to just anyone unlucky enough to get in the way - then at least that might provide us with a clearer perspective on things. After all, if the wages of sin really were death, then we might be more inclined to play along and sin less. It would send a clear and coherent message. As it is, natural disasters appear to be just that - natural. They affect everyone in their path, innocent and guilty alike. It seems to me like he's giving off mixed signals.Gotta hand it to Faith though, she makes it real easy to be an atheist. I really don't want to believe in Faith's God. For all the flaws in his argument, I like GDR's God much better.Mutate and Survive

The only thing that can purge sin is repentence.If some alien overlord makes his own arbitrary demands, that has nothing to do with the purging of sin.

Animal sacrifices are NOT accepted by God as atonement for sin in themselves. Without the Messiah's sacrifice they would not be accepted at all. It is through the faith of Old Testament believers in the promise of His sacrifice yet to come that their animal sacrifices THEN count. God honors faith, their being done in faith.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Yes I see I didn't fully grasp your point,, sorry about that.

So God accepted animal sacrifices as atonement for sin because those sacrificing animals had faith that heir sins would be atoned for by the coming of the Messiah - Is that right?But if they had faith that their sins would be atoned for by the prophesised Messiah then they wouldn't have any need to atone for their sins by sacrificing animals.Sacrificing animals to atone for sins therefore suggests a lack of faith in a sin atoning Messiah.......

The sacrifices were to demonstrate the need for sacrifice on a grand scale, to give a picture of what was required to atone for sin, the costliness of it. God gave many such physical and material pictures as a help to the faith of the people which otherwise would have been much weaker than it was. Of course you can always rewrite the Bible to suit yourself as so many here do, but in the end you may be surprised to find out it wasn't a good idea.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.