A question to those who question trinity

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Most of all, I'm talking about sacrifice, what purpose does that serve? Not an actual fee, just killing something in the name of something. It's complete rubbish. Who cares what you killed in their name? What good does that do!?

I agree. The whole concept makes no sense:

God: You have sinned! Your acts have offended me!
Man: But I also killed this sheep.
God: Well, that changes things. We're square. Carry on.

And I think that Christian atonement theology just cranks the weirdness up another level:

God: You have sinned! Your acts have offended me!
Man: But the Romans and the Sanhedrin killed Jesus.
God: Well, that changes things. We're square. Carry on.

 

[Diederick]

I agree, there's some weird, ANCIENT, poop going on in some religions.

 

[roddio]

So, you don't dispute that atonement theology is unjust; you just excuse it with the fact that lots of people do lots of unjust things?

Also, how can a perfect being choose to sin? Wouldn't the choice to sin indicate a lack of perfection?


He apparently didn't come up with a system that wouldn't create a "debt of sin".[/quot I dont think that it was fair that Jesus had to be sacrificed for us but it was needed. when you was young you had no concept of sin, as you got older you learned the difference between right and wrong and you made choices. The choices you made decided whether of not you would remain perfect. God bless

 

[roddio]

No, it's not what I'm talking about and it still doesn't make sense. First of all, God created us for selfish reasons, we don't owe him anything. And especially a God as cruel and misguided as ours.

Most of all, I'm talking about sacrifice, what purpose does that serve? Not an actual fee, just killing something in the name of something. It's complete rubbish. Who cares what you killed in their name? What good does that do!?

the purpose of sacrifice is giving the guilty a chance to get it right with God. God bless

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I dont think that it was fair that Jesus had to be sacrificed for us but it was needed.

So... your god is unfair, but he had to be unfair?

I guess you don't believe in an all-powerful God, do you?

when you was young you had no concept of sin, as you got older you learned the difference between right and wrong and you made choices. The choices you made decided whether of not you would remain perfect. God bless

Wait... so we were perfect, but our decision-making ability was imperfect? This seems contradictory to me.

 

[Riverwolf]

the purpose of sacrifice is giving the guilty a chance to get it right with God. God bless

How is sacrifice getting it right with God? That makes no sense.

 

[xkatz]

Jesus aint dead. We are to take responsibility for our actions, we will be judged by what we say and do. God bless

Then why did Jesus die for our sins?

 

[sojourner]

I've read that Jesus and Paul spent time with the Essenes. And that Jesus spend three years in India

You sayin' that God wouldn't be caught dead in India?

 

[sojourner]

Then why did Jesus die for our sins?

To fully be human means to embrace mortality. the Incarnation itself reconciled us to God.

 

[Riverwolf]

To fully be human means to embrace mortality. the Incarnation itself reconciled us to God.

How so?

 

[roddio]

So... your god is unfair, but he had to be unfair?

I guess you don't believe in an all-powerful God, do you?


Wait... so we were perfect, but our decision-making ability was imperfect? This seems contradictory to me.

I believe in an all powerful God. I believe in an all powerful God that gave us free will. If you want to be in the presence of God than you will follow what He says, if not then you wont. God bless

 

[te_lanus]

You sayin' that God wouldn't be caught dead in India?

No, I'm not implying that He won't be in India. What I'm saying is that, according that school of thought, Jesus spent a few years in India, studying under the Hindu mystics, before He went back to Israel, to become the Messiah

 

[Metempsychosis]

No, I'm not implying that He won't be in India. What I'm saying is that, according that school of thought, Jesus spent a few years in India, studying under the Hindu mystics, before He went back to Israel, to become the Messiah

There is some chance of this to happen,though obviously Christians will disagree with this.
Jesus is God is not a statement hanging in the air.
""We are not stoning you for any of these," replied the religious leaders, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God."
Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your Law, 'I have said you are gods"

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

To fully be human means to embrace mortality. the Incarnation itself reconciled us to God.

If to be fully human means to embrace mortality, then to the individual Christian, wouldn't Christianity be a rejection of the believer's own humanity?

The "death" that Christians embrace is eternal life. I don't think that this can really be said to be death at all.

I believe in an all powerful God. I believe in an all powerful God that gave us free will.

Ah. So God could have chosen a fair system (since, being all-powerful, he could have done anything) but instead chose an unfair one?

If you want to be in the presence of God than you will follow what He says, if not then you wont. God bless

But wouldn't a perfect being understand this and wouldn't a perfect being want to be in the presence of God?

IOW, if a person were to choose to not be in the presence of God, isn't this a sign that he was imperfect?

 

[Riverwolf]

I believe in an all powerful God. I believe in an all powerful God that gave us free will. If you want to be in the presence of God than you will follow what He says, if not then you wont. God bless

And which books contain what He said?

 

[roddio]

And which books contain what He said?

The Bible. God bless

 

[roddio]

If to be fully human means to embrace mortality, then to the individual Christian, wouldn't Christianity be a rejection of the believer's own humanity?

The "death" that Christians embrace is eternal life. I don't think that this can really be said to be death at all.


Ah. So God could have chosen a fair system (since, being all-powerful, he could have done anything) but instead chose an unfair one?


But wouldn't a perfect being understand this and wouldn't a perfect being want to be in the presence of God?

IOW, if a person were to choose to not be in the presence of God, isn't this a sign that he was imperfect?

He couldve chose to do what He wanted and He did, It really doesnt matter what you or I think when it comes to what He chose to do. all types of beings want to be in the presence of God. If A person chose not to be in the presence of God that would be there choice. God bless

 

[Riverwolf]

The Bible. God bless

Which books and which canon?

It's clear to me that many of the Biblical books, primarily the epistles and certain books in Kethuvim, were NOT spoken by God at all, but the work of people like you and me. It's clear, for example, that the Psalms were composed by poets, as they are spoken from the viewpoint of a praying person. Job, also, was written by a person trying to explain why good people often suffer in his opinion. As for the epistles, those were written by people with an evangelical agenda.

It also is fact that there were several Christian books that, for whatever reason, were excluded from the canon. I'm not talking only about Gnostic texts, but there are several other texts that, as far as I know, aren't Gnostic at all, such as the Shepherd of Hermas and Apocalypse of Peter, yet were excluded.

Also doesn't help that there are several canons of the Old Testament besides the standard Jewish Tanakh.

 

[roddio]

Which books and which canon?

It's clear to me that many of the Biblical books, primarily the epistles and certain books in Kethuvim, were NOT spoken by God at all, but the work of people like you and me. It's clear, for example, that the Psalms were composed by poets, as they are spoken from the viewpoint of a praying person. Job, also, was written by a person trying to explain why good people often suffer in his opinion. As for the epistles, those were written by people with an evangelical agenda.

It also is fact that there were several Christian books that, for whatever reason, were excluded from the canon. I'm not talking only about Gnostic texts, but there are several other texts that, as far as I know, aren't Gnostic at all, such as the Shepherd of Hermas and Apocalypse of Peter, yet were excluded.

Also doesn't help that there are several canons of the Old Testament besides the standard Jewish Tanakh.

I believe that all things written in the bible by the writers was inspired by God. whether we choose to see it or not we do the same as the bible writers we tell about the good and bad things that happen in our lives in hopes that someone will be helped, whether you're an atheist or believer or whatever so God still uses us to help. God bless

 

[Riverwolf]

I believe that all things written in the bible by the writers was inspired by God. whether we choose to see it or not we do the same as the bible writers we tell about the good and bad things that happen in our lives in hopes that someone will be helped, whether you're an atheist or believer or whatever so God still uses us to help. God bless

I'm not disputing whether or not they were inspired by God; several pieces of literature over the ages have had divine inspiration; I've written a some poems that were inspired by the divine. (Though most of them are incomplete.)

The question is whether or not they were actually dictated by God through a person, which, I think, is clearly not the case with the vast majority of Biblical literature.

The Bible's contents are not consistent. Do you accept the so-called Apocrypha as God-inspired? Not just Jewish Apocrypha, but Christian Apocrypha? Do you accept the Secrets of Enoch? The Book of Jubilees? The Ethiopian Bible includes these texts. What about The Shepherd of Hermas? The Acts of Pilate? The Gospel of Thomas? Were they dictated by God?