Forgiveness

[sojourner]

There are two different people here - for example say there is a Judge who just found out that one of his sons was abused by a pedophile. As a father he needs to forgive the man for his evil act otherwise hatred will eat him alive, but as a Judge he should not forgive the pedophile brought before him. The pedophile must be properly tried and given the just punishment.

Forgiveness is for us, we should forgive, God should not.

and yet, God does!

 

[sojourner]

Unless you want to argue that the Bible is unproven (I would not disagree with you there but the Scriptures are foundational to Christian doctrine) then you have to accept that Jesus said these things.

No, you don't.

But to this very day the Eucharist is celebrated in RCC and EO churches and they hold that the transubstantiation of the crucified Christ is one of the seven sacraments or mysteries of the faith.

You're wrong. In the first place, the Orthodox don't hold with transubstantiation. In the second place, it's not transubstantiation that's the sacrament. It's the meal that's the sacrament. Third, neither arm of the Church celebrates a crucified Christ. In Eucharist, it's the living Christ in which we participate.

Clearly you guys have no historical context for the Christian faith nor have you troubled to learn even the most basic teachings except the "Golden Rule" which is not uniquely Christian.

Clearly, you don't have any idea what we've been taught, for you are saying that we've been taught what we have not been taught.

I am an ex-Christian because of Reason

Perhaps your reasoning, not unlike your theological take on the Church, is flawed.

The death of Christ is entirely about reconciliation between God and man.

The life of Christ teaches us to forgive each other. Herein lies the conflict in the OP.

Any intelligent responses? Please?

The death of Christ is about his self-sacrifice -- a supreme act of love. It has nothing to do with "substitutionary atonement." Either redemptive theology can be inferred from the Bible, and the Church is split about 50/50 on that issue.

Again, it's the Incarnation that is redemptive. Look at the thrust of the gospel message: We became dirty. Since we could not wash ourselves clean through the Law, God became dirty for us by becoming one of us. By becoming one of us, God reconciled us to God's Self. The crucifixion was just the icing on the cake -- necessary only to the degree that death could be overcome -- but not because the act of crucifixion was necessary. It was the act of self-giving that was necessary.

 

[slave2six]

You sure do know how to proof-text, don't you!
Orthodox theology is one of the sanest, most reasonable bodies of work in Xy. Read up on some of it!

Enlighten me, o wise sage.

 

[slave2six]

Or, maybe you'd be deceiving yourself by taking these passages out of context and coming up with "fundagelical wackism."

that is neither and argument not educational. Tell me what you think about the subject matter.

 

[slave2six]

No, you don't.

Really? Then just because the Scriptures say that Jesus said something then you don't have to take it that he actually said something. What the heck is the point of writing any of it down if you're just going to ignore it?

The death of Christ is about his self-sacrifice -- a supreme act of love. It has nothing to do with "substitutionary atonement." Either redemptive theology can be inferred from the Bible, and the Church is split about 50/50 on that issue.

Again, it's the Incarnation that is redemptive. Look at the thrust of the gospel message: We became dirty. Since we could not wash ourselves clean through the Law, God became dirty for us by becoming one of us. By becoming one of us, God reconciled us to God's Self. The crucifixion was just the icing on the cake -- necessary only to the degree that death could be overcome -- but not because the act of crucifixion was necessary. It was the act of self-giving that was necessary.

Necessary for what purpose?

 

[PureX]

Really? Then just because the Scriptures say that Jesus said something then you don't have to take it that he actually said something. What the heck is the point of writing any of it down if you're just going to ignore it?

Some of the numbers in the phone book are wrong, and some of them aren't. But we don't throw out the book just because some are found to be wrong. We use the book and cross out the wrong numbers when we find them.

Nothing man does is perfect, including his religion. And besides, things are always changing. So what we do "right" today may turn out to be not so right as conditions change in the future. Think of slavery in the bible, as an example.

 

[idea]

BTW - Your comment above is 100% wrong.

2 Corinthians 5: 18-20: "Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to Himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation, namely, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation. Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God."

Colossians 1: 19-22 "For it was the Father's good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven. And although you were formerly alienated and hostile in mind, engaged in evil deeds, yet He has now reconciled you in His fleshly body through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach."
​

40 ... Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
(New Testament | Matthew25:40)

the only way to grow close to God - to be reconciled to Him, is to grow close to one another.
The only way to be blameless, is for no one to blame you for anything - for everyone to forgive you.
The only way to be "beyond reproach" is for no one to "reproach" you.

10 And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground.
(Old Testament | Genesis4:10)
our condemnation comes from others... only when we can all forgive one another will there be no reproach or blame or blood crying from the ground.

it is about the rest of us having a reason to forgive one another.

We need to forgive one another before we can be forgiven by God.

27 Then the lord of that servant was moved with compassion, and loosed him, and forgave him the debt.
28 But the same servant went out, and found one of his fellowservants, which owed him aan hundred pence: and he laid hands on him, and took him by the throat, saying, Pay me that thou owest.
29 And his fellowservant fell down at his feet, and besought him, saying, Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all.
30 And he would not: but went and cast him into prison, till he should pay the debt.
31 So when his fellowservants saw what was done, they were very sorry, and came and told unto their lord all that was done.
32 Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that adebt, because thou desiredst me:
33 aShouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had cpity on thee?
34 And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him.
35 So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses.
(New Testament | Matthew18:27 - 35)

It is about us forgiving one another.

 

[idea]

Just how does any of that relate to my opening question? Do you actually have a point or are you trying to call me names? I'm not clear on your purpose in this discussion.

you said

Clearly you guys have no historical context for the Christian faith

Much of what we see in history under the guise of "Christianity" was not "Christianity" at all. I am not calling you names, I am naming what happened earlier in history. A rose by any other name... don't be fooled by a name - don't call it christianity if it is not.

 

[Riverwolf]

Much of what we see in history under the guise of "Christianity" was not "Christianity" at all. I am not calling you names, I am naming what happened earlier in history. A rose by any other name... don't be fooled by a name - don't call it christianity if it is not.

How do you judge whether or not it's Christianity?

I see no reason to believe they didn't have complete Faith in Christ.

 

[slave2six]

Some of the numbers in the phone book are wrong, and some of them aren't. But we don't throw out the book just because some are found to be wrong. We use the book and cross out the wrong numbers when we find them.

Nothing man does is perfect, including his religion. And besides, things are always changing. So what we do "right" today may turn out to be not so right as conditions change in the future. Think of slavery in the bible, as an example.

Therefore, you can just pick and choose whatever you want to within the Scriptures thus turning it from an authoritative document to a mere reference book to support your particular opinion. That is, the entire thing is worthless by your standard.

 

[slave2six]

We need to forgive one another before we can be forgiven by God.

But you said earlier:

It's not about God forgiving us - it is about the rest of us having a reason to forgive one another.

Make up your mind.

Ultimately it's all about God forgiving people which was in the OP which you tried to deny and then you supported. What meds are you on?

 

[PureX]

Therefore, you can just pick and choose whatever you want to within the Scriptures thus turning it from an authoritative document to a mere reference book to support your particular opinion. That is, the entire thing is worthless by your standard.

No, it's worthless by YOUR standard. By my standard it is a good and useful tool, it's just not perfect.

And by the way, EVERYONE is "picking and choosing". Even those who pick the bible and choose to imagine that it's inerrant are still picking and choosing. Because that's what we humans do. Ignorance is part of the human condition, so all we can do is pick what makes sense to us and choose to go with it as true until we learn otherwise.

 

[zenzero]

Friend slave2six,

Forgiveness

Personally the understanding is that surrender of the EGO leads to the merging of the individual energy with the universal energy and when someone is forgiving automatically means that there is someone forgiving and that someone is only an EGO.
Basically the internalization of FORGIVENESS is that we forgive ourselves for allowing the EGO to get hurt by some external force.
Rgds that sacrifice of Jesus by crucification is the feeling of others and not of Jesus. Am sure he never said he was sacrificing or anything but his followers felt it that way.
Love & rgds

 

[Here I am, send me]

The Crucifixion was how we were forgiven, through Jesus. All are forgiven because of His death, it is just the choice of some weather to except this forgiveness on faith through a belief in Christ.

 

[logician]

Jesus was a man who "went about doing good" and when he encountered someone in need of forgiveness, he pretty much just forgave them. Even when they didn't ask for it. Even in the story of him being crucified he forgave the guys who were butchering him.

When Peter asked him how often he should forgive his neighbor "up to seven times?" Jesus replied, "No. Seventy times seven" or in essence, "never stop forgiving someone who asks for it."

So, considering all this, what the heck is all this bloody sacrifice on a cross about? If as a man Jesus could forgive people and he instructed his followers to forgive liberally without demanding recompense, why isn't God able to forgive without bloodshed? The story of the death of Christ is at complete odds with the life of Christ. Any Christians care to explain this?

Hey, nobody said religion had to make logical sense.

 

[zenzero]

Friend Here I am ...,
Agree to what you mentioned BUT again it is the believers belief and nothing to do with Jesus.
Love & rgds

 

[darkendless]

Why should we forgive one another? If someone requires a second chance they didn't deserve a first. "Learning from mistakes" doesn't cut the mustard, mistakes should not be made in the first place, especially when, in many cases, the offender is well aware of the consequences.

Why give someone another chance to let you down? Wiping their slate clean of forgiveness will never teach them anything, only that if they appear sorry enough they can get away with it. If anyone was truelly sorry they wouldn't have been stupid enough to require forgiveness in the first place

 

[Riverwolf]

The Crucifixion was how we were forgiven, through Jesus. All are forgiven because of His death, it is just the choice of some weather to except this forgiveness on faith through a belief in Christ.

We already know that. That's not the problem here.

The question being asked is, "Why is it necessary? Why can't God just simply forgive us?"

 

[RamaRaksha]

and yet, God does!

Great so what does the pedophile or murderer learn? How nice for someone after he or she dies and goes to heaven and sees his pedophile living it up in heaven! Or the wife of an abuser meeting up with her husband in heaven!

So the terrorists who killed 3,000 innocents on 9/11 are in heaven now? How nice for their victims and those relatives who are living with the pain of the loss of their loved ones.

Karma & Rebirth is the only correct way - Karma forces one to take responsibility, be reborn, make things right. No judge God to simply forgive our errors - we cannot escape responsibility, Rebirth gives us another chance to make things right.

Say you are driving at night and hit a bump, you think you may have hit someone. Do you continue thinking that even if you killed someone, God will forgive you? What kind of a message does that send?

Karma forces you to deal with the situation, you cannot run away from your responsibilites. You have to stop the car and attend to the person you ran over, if it is not this life, then the next!

 

[Jordan St. Francis]

Slave4six seems to have only a very narrow reading of Pauline- Protestant/ Anselmian Christianity.

The Church, historically and currently, has far richer understanding of the Cross. One should begin with the Incarnation, but not end there.