Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
The point was that there was no sacrifice if he came back to life.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How can you be a True Christian™ if you don't take the Eden story literally?
- Thread starter ppp
- Start date
-
- Tags
- fall naked bodz! soteriology
ppp
Well-Known Member
He lost a weekend.
None of the Jesus myth makes any sense, whether the Old Testament is considered true or not. The absurdity is that God created the world as it is, but then things went so bad with humans after thje Fall that God had to flood the earth to get rid of sin (that didn't work, as we know.) So sin got bad as the populations grews and then the next fix was to get a woman pregnant so eventually the son would be executed as a sacrifice to God so the sins of mankind would be atoned. Did it really fix anything? Not that we can tell.
So God wasn't powerful enough to just forgive the sins of mankind without killing a guy? No, it's absurd to believe literally. This story is obviously symbolic and not real.
I suggest most of Christianity is a bounced check.
It would be super interestng to read the liner notes of all the people who wrote these stories, and then agreed to make them part of the Tanakh. It kind of amazes me that there isn't any history about it. But that could have been banned, it supposedly being from God and all.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
The way Matt Dilahunty formulates it, always cracks me up...
"God sacrificed himself to himself to save us from himself, in order to act as a loophole for a completely messed up system that he himself is also ultimately responsible for."
I'm sorry, but I have nothing to contribute to the topic other than sharing that I did a spit-take with my coffee when I glanced up at the tags for the thread and saw "naked bodz!"
Well damn, put it that way now I am totally convinced this God exists (as an incompetent God). Has he earned my respect and worship? Hell no, I have standards.
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
There's a progression of Bible and NT stories that "true" Christian/Bible believers are supposed to take literally. But at some point, more and more of them stop insisting on it being literal. Like the Pentecostal kinds of Christians take the gifts of the spirit very literal. They believe that Jesus and God can and will heal them. So, some of them take it to the extreme and don't go to doctors and don't take any medications and trust the God will heal them of cancer and other diseases.
Then, my all-time favorite Christians, for taking things too far, are the snake handlers. Because on verse says that a believer in Jesus will be able to drink deadly poison and will be able to pick up serpents and not be harmed, they drink poison and handle rattlesnakes... and lots of them get maimed or die.
So, even with Christians that claim to "believe" literally hit a point to where they start to use their brains, and figure, "No, it's just too crazy to believe that." Yeah, but a literal 6-day creation a few thousand years ago, talking animals, a world-wide flood, a virgin birth and people coming back from the dead were believable? Or is it because those other extreme literal beliefs can get a person dead? So, they take the time to analyze those verses and question them before they go all in and say they believe and then act on them?
InChrist
Free4ever
Then the point is wrong.
There was a complete sacrifice because Jesus was fully human and He died…period. As the scriptures state He died the for sins of human beings, so He had to be human and die a human death.
He came back to life because He is also fully God. Because He is fully God, He alone could pay for the sins of the world and provide new, eternal life.
Last edited:
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Sorry, but the concept of substitutionary atonement is just garbage when one analyzes it. The idea of a sacrifice goes back to old concepts of primitive religions that think that someone or something has to be to blame for wrongs. If one believes in an omniscient omnipotent God then the ultimate fault of all problems are his. I need to refer back to the Matt Dillahunty quote:
"God sacrificed himself to himself to save us from himself, in order to act as a loophole for a completely messed up system that he himself is also ultimately responsible for."
Do you see how that refutes your claim?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Are you talking about the Garden of Eden myth? He was the only one that did not lie in that story.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe that is false. A true Christian is one who has received Jesus as Lord and Savior. What you defined were called Judaizers.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe it is not a myth but is the inspired word of God.
No The Garden of Eden takes place a long time after the fall of man. And no, the devil did not tell the whole truth. Sometimes lies are inserted along with truths hoping that the person can't tell the difference.
And he came back to life, period. But that’s ok because none of it makes any sense.
All due to God’s decisions. Humans sin due to God creating the world the way he did. And his best fix was to kill a guy?
Thanks for acknowledging this.
Bounced check.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
No, I don't know where you got that from.. The Judaizers were clearly a different group:
Judaizers - Wikipedia
Perhaps you meant something else but no one can tell from that post.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
It is too bad that you do not understand it then. Is God omnipotent? Is God omniscient?
Not very wise to believe this.
Great, a whole new interpretation of the Bible that isn’t consistent with the text. And even Jews don’t take it literally, and it’s their book. But Christians are going to come along and say Jews are wrong? Not very wise.