|
Author
|
Topic: Are creationists capable of autonomous, self-propelled flight?
|
Karl
Inactive Member
|
With respect, fmf, that's only one view. It's the SA - Substitutionary Atonement viewpoint. It's not bad, as far as it goes, but many people inside as well as outside the church have problems with it. Another way of looking at it is summarised (by me) at No webpage found at provided URL: http://freespace.virgin.net/karl_and.gnome/believe.htm, in the section headed "Salvation". I find this a more useful model. Theological models are like scientific models. They're not the absolute truth, just the best we can manage.
|
compmage
Member (Idle past 5182 days) Posts: 601 From: South Africa Joined: 08-04-2005
|
quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Death=seperation from God, Life=proximity to God.
So you redefine words and terms so that it doesn't sound so bad? It still makes no difference. God (from what you have said) is capable of forgiving sins. He could have done it any which way he wanted. Why did he have to kill his own son when he could have just forgiven us?
quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
Our sin seperates us from God the penalty is death. That's just the way it is, it's what God told Adam right off the bat.
Death (seperation) from a being this cruel seems like heaven  to me.
quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
So we screwed up, every single one of us sins. God is Holy and cannot tolerate sin, Jesus did not sin yet he paid the price willingly in order to save those who would accept this gift.
Why bother dying. God could just have forgiven us and avoided all the suffering.
quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
Those who do not want this gift do not have to take it. Free-will. If they do not take this gift that was offered then they are responsible for their own account with God. Death. Eternal seperation from God.
Again, this doesn't seem like such a bad option.
quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
So unless Jesus the new High Priest, intercedes for you on your behalf , then you're on your own. The only one who can pay the price for you is Jesus.
But he didn't have too. Or are you saying god is limitted? That he has to follow someone elses rules?
quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
This is why Jesus had to live, die and rise again to build that bridge between man and God, that man may cross over into fellowship with his creator.
But if god is all powerful he could have forgiven our sins in any way he wanted. Unless there is a greater being than god who imposses limits on what god may and may not do, he could have snapped his fingers and removed all sin, why send your son to die when there is a simpler, less painful way of doing it? ------------------ compmage
|
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 33 of 40 (26529)
12-13-2002 5:04 PM
|
Reply to: Message 32 by compmage
12-10-2002 1:26 AM
|
|
quote:
Death=seperation from God, Life=proximity to God. So you redefine words and terms so that it doesn't sound so bad?
I didn't redifind the words I gave a more accurate definition. The standard definition only applies to the physical.
quote:
Death (seperation) from a being this cruel seems like heaven to me
Again you want to blame God. It is mans own fault not God's. God didn't make the mistake. God was not the one that gave in to temptation.
quote:
Why bother dying. God could just have forgiven us and avoided all the suffering.
Does a judge who is a just judge forgive a criminal for his crime without punishment? No if God is just which we know he is, then the penalty for the crime must be paid. The fact that Jesus came died and rose again is a testament to God's love and grace, not to the limitation of his power.
quote:
Again, this doesn't seem like such a bad option.
And again it's your choice.
quote:
But he didn't have too. Or are you saying god is limitted? That he has to follow someone elses rules?
You're right Jesus even as a man had the choice of whether or not to go to the cross for us. The only rules God has to follow are his own, because he is holy.
quote:
But if god is all powerful he could have forgiven our sins in any way he wanted. Unless there is a greater being than god who imposses limits on what god may and may not do, he could have snapped his fingers and removed all sin, why send your son to die when there is a simpler, less painful way of doing it?
Because God is just, the penalty had to be paid. The only way for this was through Jesus Christ. Does this make any sense to you? ------------------ saved by grace
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 32 by compmage, posted 12-10-2002 1:26 AM | | compmage has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 34 by compmage, posted 12-17-2002 4:04 AM | | funkmasterfreaky has replied |
|
compmage
Member (Idle past 5182 days) Posts: 601 From: South Africa Joined: 08-04-2005
|
quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
I didn't redifind the words I gave a more accurate definition. The standard definition only applies to the physical.
You missed this part:
quote:
Originally posted by compmage:
It still makes no difference. God (from what you have said) is capable of forgiving sins. He could have done it any which way he wanted. Why did he have to kill his own son when he could have just forgiven us?
Care to answer the question?
quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
Again you want to blame God. It is mans own fault not God's. God didn't make the mistake. God was not the one that gave in to temptation.
I don't blame god. He (apparently) made the rules and could have made them any way he wanted. Why did he decide to be cruel about it?
quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
Does a judge who is a just judge forgive a criminal for his crime without punishment? No if God is just which we know he is, then the penalty for the crime must be paid. The fact that Jesus came died and rose again is a testament to God's love and grace, not to the limitation of his power.
A judge doesn't write the laws, he just has to follow them, god on the other had (apparently) did write the 'laws'. You are missing the point. God could have forgiven our 'sins' any way he wanted too. Why did he decide that his son(himself) had to die?
quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
You're right Jesus even as a man had the choice of whether or not to go to the cross for us. The only rules God has to follow are his own, because he is holy.
So why did he decide that his son (himself) had to die before he would fogive our 'sins'? He could have just required us to ask forgiveness.
quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
Because God is just, the penalty had to be paid. The only way for this was through Jesus Christ. Does this make any sense to you?
The penalty only had to be paid because god said so. If he decided that a pentalty didn't have to be paid then much suffering could have been avoided. Remember, god apparently makes ALL THE RULES. He decided that certain actions were sinful. He decided that sins had to be paid for. He decided that the only appropriote payment was his own sons death or eternal suffering. Why is he this cruel? ------------------ compmage
|
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 35 of 40 (28210)
12-31-2002 2:29 PM
|
Reply to: Message 34 by compmage
12-17-2002 4:04 AM
|
|
God sending his son was a display of his love for humanity. Call it cruel if you like. I don't see love as cruel. ------------------ Saved by an incredible Grace.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 34 by compmage, posted 12-17-2002 4:04 AM | | compmage has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 36 by mark24, posted 12-31-2002 2:39 PM | | funkmasterfreaky has replied | | | Message 39 by compmage, posted 01-14-2003 12:58 AM | | funkmasterfreaky has not replied |
|
mark24
Member (Idle past 5224 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: 12-01-2001
|
quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
God sending his son was a display of his love for humanity. Call it cruel if you like. I don't see love as cruel.
God could have just hand waved it away, he's omnipotent, right? No one HAD to die, there doesn't even need to be sin, for chrissakes! Why would he need to sacrifice his "son" for something he created anyway? Are we supposed to feel grateful? It would be like me cutting off my hand to save you because you deliberately ate a cooky after I told you not to. God chose to do it that way, though. Jesus could have got drunk for our sins, ate pizza for our sins, or become a comedian for our sins, but no, the old man upstairs demands sacrifice. A little silly don't you think? No one had to get so much as a chinese burn, let alone get nailed to a plank & suffer the-most-painful-death-imaginable. Sounds to me like he's got anger problems. Mark ------------------ Occam's razor is not for shaving with.
|
funkmasterfreaky
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 37 of 40 (28213)
12-31-2002 2:46 PM
|
Reply to: Message 36 by mark24
12-31-2002 2:39 PM
|
|
God could have done it any way he wanted to you are right there. The conclusion I came to last night was that it was a display of love. Also a metaphor of us dying to sin and a resurrection to righteousness. I am personally grateful that because of Christ I am no longer a slave to sin. ------------------ Saved by an incredible Grace.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 36 by mark24, posted 12-31-2002 2:39 PM | | mark24 has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 38 by mark24, posted 12-31-2002 9:37 PM | | funkmasterfreaky has not replied |
|
mark24
Member (Idle past 5224 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: 12-01-2001
|
quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
God could have done it any way he wanted to you are right there. The conclusion I came to last night was that it was a display of love. Also a metaphor of us dying to sin and a resurrection to righteousness. I am personally grateful that because of Christ I am no longer a slave to sin.
Fine & dandy, but I'm convinced you would interpret any alleged murder/death/sacrifice/horrific act as one of love, if you can interpret an act of love as having a chap banged to a board & being left to bleed to death over several days. What a loving chap! NOT! No one had to die. Have a chinese burn. Have lemon twisted in a papercut. Have a stillborn child/spontaneous miscarriage. But God, being impotent, oh I mean omnipotent, could have not invented sin in the first place, & for the betterment of all made the earth a disease free fuckfest where children are perfect & unaffected by there parents failings, & only appear when o "soul" has departed, so as not to cause overcrowding. Non? What in 'tarnation was his agenda?! He may have had love for humanity, but not for humans. Wouldn't he? What would be the "loving" thing to do? Make all things "nice" dangerous or have negative consequences? Explain this to the congenitaly diseased & DEAD, please. Of course, you'll give a "just so" story of why we must suffer, but we needn't. There IS no need of sin, suffering, disease, WHATSOEVER. But, since "god" made it all, I BLAME him for the suffering that needn't have been. What a git. What a vicious, vindictive individual. You expect the rest of us to "worship" him/her/it/them? Mark ------------------ Occam's razor is not for shaving with. [This message has been edited by mark24, 12-31-2002] [This message has been edited by mark24, 01-01-2003]
|
compmage
Member (Idle past 5182 days) Posts: 601 From: South Africa Joined: 08-04-2005
|
quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
God sending his son was a display of his love for humanity. Call it cruel if you like. I don't see love as cruel.
I see mark24 has done a good job of responding while I was on leave and you have yet to respond to his last post. A question: Why is needlessly letting your own son die a loving act? ------------------ compmage
|
thousands_not_billions
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 40 of 40 (29324)
01-16-2003 11:08 PM
|
Reply to: Message 2 by Mammuthus
09-05-2002 11:46 AM
|
|
================ I don't know about self propelled flight but most seem to be full of enough hot air to circle the world a few times....that is if it was not flat...doh! ================ Um, what is the point of this? Please don't attack people, just attack ideas if you have to.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 2 by Mammuthus, posted 09-05-2002 11:46 AM | | Mammuthus has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2