All non Christians ought to be crucified....

[DavidFirth]

I'm game for hearing how you could rationalize this away.

No, you're right, that is not the way the Gospel ought to be presented. But if you want to hear it the right way I'm glad to oblige. For the very, very short version:

Romans 3:23
John 3:16
Acts 2:42

 

[DavidFirth]

I came back to Christianity nearly two years ago but I'm thinking much of faith is based on our emotions. Anyways. I'm at a cross roads now. But well aware of what the Bible states.

Very well. I once tried to turn away from the faith but I just cannot turn my back on the cross, I can't turn my back on Jesus, I just can't do it. And I'm joyful that I can't.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I understand what you mean. I just want to clarify that I don't presume that the Bible is true. I'm just pointing out that this is ''what (or something that) is written in it.'' And trying to clarify what is the meaning of: Christ suffered for your (our) sins. Hypothetically, if I accept the fact that Jesus Christ, Son of God, suffered for our sins - it still doesn't make sense that he would have suffered for the Sins that weren't committed yet. At the very best, he could have suffered for the past sins, and the present sins. But he could not have suffered for the future sins.

Because if you accepted that Jesus suffered for the Sins committed today, it then entails a completely deterministic universe where free will does not exist, where everything was already scripted and followed 100% since the dawn of man. Therefor rendering the concept of Sins completely erroneous(ed*: or obsolete); because if free will does not exist; how can someone be a sinner? For the sin to exist, there must be a good path and an evil path; free will.

How could have Jesus known that Bob Planche and Helena Quartz would commit adultery yesterday? So did he suffer for their sins? That doesn't hold up unless he knew that those 2 would sin yesterday.

Someone could also defend the position, that Jesus suffered for possible hypothetical future sins. But that doesn't hold up, not in my mind anyway.

If Jesus suffered for someone or anyone's sin: it was the sins of the past and the sins committed during his time on earth.

When his suffering ended, he stopped suffering for any past and present (at the time) sins.

You have good and new points I havent read before. When I practice, jesus did not save me. I was saved In him. He didnt save me from my sins but by my devotion, I chose to put myself in his suffering so in one body/one mass we would be blessed and forgiven by god, to live enternally or have salvaton.

In the bible, it ways I think Peter was "crucified IN jesus", and the church says "in him, through, him,..." but none says that he directly saved us without our effort (most lurtigical churches).

Its protestants that separate their act in the salvation process.

According to your points, do you think it makes more sense that believers are saved in christ rather than christ saving each person individually?

 

[Father Heathen]

The wages of sin is death. Actually, hell will be pretty bad, in the lake of fire and all.

If I were end to up before god in judgement and I got cast to hell, right as the pit opens beneath me I would quickly grab god by the beard and yank him along with me, then ride him like a surfboard all the way down.

 

[Valjean]

Popularity isn't the measure I use. I like truth. Jesus is truth.

You misunderstand. I'm saying that if a position is well supported and reasonable, it's generally accepted.
Christianity is not generally accepted and, even amongst Christians, there is general disagreement over important points of theology.
ergo: Christianity is not reasonable or well supported.

True, but we believe the Bible is the inerrant word of God and we tell you these things because we care about you.

Understood; but when we point out your errors in reasoning and inconsistencies in your textbook -- because we care about you -- you completely ignore us.
I can only conclude that your religion is an idee fixe and you're not really interested in truth.

 

[Windwalker]

Very well. I once tried to turn away from the faith but I just cannot turn my back on the cross, I can't turn my back on Jesus, I just can't do it. And I'm joyful that I can't.

Have you ever considered that changing how you believe about Jesus may actually honor him?

 

[Ponder This]

Is this the logical implication of rejecting a Christ who suffered the punishment due to us?

Are you referring to punishment received during this lifetime or punishment received after this life ends?

If you are referring to punishment in this lifetime, then who will do the punishing? Christians aren't called upon to persecute non-Christians for not accepting Christ and certainly not called upon specifically to crucify them.

If you are referring to after this life ends, then who can say exactly what the punishment will be? It isn't written anywhere that those who reject Christ will suffer crucifixion specifically as their punishment, only that they will suffer according to their sins.

This matter is not between you and other Christians that are living in this world, but between you and God according to what exists within your own heart. So if you are truly content within your own heart that all is well for you in this life and the next, then what is there for you to fear? Go and Live Well. Peace be upon you.

 

[InChrist]

Is this the logical implication of rejecting a Christ who suffered the punishment due to us?

NOT according to the scriptures.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

And He certainly would not punish someone for using their brain, examining the evidence, or rather lack of and concluding the Christian narrative is largely made up.

Same with the Muslim narrative.

 

[leibowde84]

Is this the logical implication of rejecting a Christ who suffered the punishment due to us?

Nope. Not logical in the least. Non-Christians aren't convinced that the claims made in the Bible are true. So, it would be wholly unreasonable and illogical to hold them accountable for those claims.

 

[leibowde84]

The wages of sin is death. Actually, hell will be pretty bad, in the lake of fire and all.

So, are you saying that non-christians should be crucified?

 

[Muslim-UK]

Same with the Muslim narrative.

You would have to explain the Shakta/LHP/Pagan narrative for me to make a direct comparison.

In a nutshell the Islamic narrative is everyone is born with knowledge of God, the One GOD. Humans are created to wanting a relationship with Him, and through worship and prayer they find a connection, gaining peace within. Humans have freewill to accept or reject God, and every Nation has been sent Messengers explaining who God is. We are told to lead lives pleasing to God, being kind to one's neighbour, feeding the poor, doing good works and always remembering God. Our book of guidance is the Qur'an, which through the use of Arabic is superior to any other book in its class. It contains hundreds of signs for people who think and reflect, it is a miracle that has been preserved for over 1,400 years.

Over to you.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

You would have to explain the Shakta/LHP/Pagan narrative for me to make a direct comparison.

In a nutshell the Islamic narrative is everyone is born with knowledge of God, the One GOD. Humans are created to wanting a relationship with Him, and through worship and prayer they find a connection, gaining peace within. Humans have freewill to accept or reject God, and every Nation has been sent Messengers explaining who God is. We are told to lead lives pleasing to God, being kind to one's neighbour, feeding the poor, doing good works and always remembering God. Our book of guidance is the Qur'an, which through the use of Arabic is superior to any other book in its class. It contains hundreds of signs for people who think and reflect, it is a miracle that has been preserved for over 1,400 years.

Over to you.

There is no "narrative" to my religion. Shaktism is the branch of Hinduism that upholds the Goddess as the Ultimate Reality (Brahman). I'm a non-dualist. The purpose of life, as I see it, is to recognize our true nature as pure consciousness and break the cycle of samsara. We have sacred writings but it's not a holy book religion. We have holy people but no prophets like in Abarahamic religions. Anyone can be a priest or priestess, we don't tend to care about Brahmins or caste and lean towards being boundary and social custom breaking. We tend to oppose orthodoxy in my tradition, which focuses on Kali as the Divine Mother.

I'm also a Satanist and think that Satan is the archetype of our Shadow Self which should be faced and accepted.

 

[Windwalker]

No, you're right, that is not the way the Gospel ought to be presented. But if you want to hear it the right way I'm glad to oblige. For the very, very short version:

Romans 3:23
John 3:16
Acts 2:42

It may not be how it should presented, but isn't that presentation basically the unsanitized version of it? Doesn't it boil down to that, according the beliefs of many Christians?

 

[Serpent Child]

 

[Jainarayan]

Jesus is truth.

To you he is. That makes him relative and subjective truth, not absolute truth.

 

[Jainarayan]

True, but we believe the Bible is the inerrant word of God and we tell you these things because we care about you.

I know what the Bible says, and I don't accept it. Nor do I want to be cared for so much that caring becomes offensive, obnoxious annoying and condescending... condescending in presuming to know what's best for me, and that I can't make my own decisions. That's why so many Christians are disliked, they don't know when to back off. They take the "Great Commission" too seriously, and to obnoxious levels. You dig? You feel me?

 

[Jainarayan]

If I were end up before god in judgement and I get cast to hell, right as the pit opens beneath me I would quickly grab god by the beard and yank him along with me, then ride him like a surfboard all the way down.

Like Gandalf did? The only difference being that the Balrog wrapped its whip around Gandalf's knees and dragged him down into the abyss. But Gandalf grabbed the Balrog's horns and rode that bad boy down like a boss.

 

[The Holy Bottom Burp]

Christ is not the name of a servant named Jesus. Christ is the eternal information that all us servants of God testify to during the 1,000 year reign of Christ. This means that Christ has never died or suffered.

Damn Eldios, I thought you must be a teenager but your profile says you are 8 years older than me! Do you belong to a particular denomination that teaches this stuff, or are you a troll pretending to be a 58 year old man? Serious question, because I cant take anything you say seriously.

 

[Deidre]

I might just start referring to this thread when people question why I'm not interested in Christianity, anymore.