Your saved as soon as you accept jesus.

[Yes]

I was not on this thread to defend my beliefs, as mine were not presented. I was on here to ask questions about the beliefs posted in the OP. Whether or not I got them wrong in your opinion is of no consequence, again. I asked a question and instead of having my questions answered. I continue to get berated by 3 separate people, because my views are not in line with yours. You try to turn it around and make me look like that bad guy, for asking simple questions, that I thought someone with religious views would kind enough to answer. I mean, I did answer your question of me. Please, you want to turn this around and question my beliefs go ahead. I will present a defense.

I have been answering your questions.

 

[The Hammer]

I have been answering your questions.

Correct, you have. But @disciple , instead of engaging me in discussion/debate. Has instead been bashing me, for unintentionally misrepresenting his OP. Even though the OP is insanely vague, and nondescript.

 

[Desert Snake]

I was not on this thread to defend my beliefs, as mine were not presented. I was on here to ask questions about the beliefs posted in the OP. Whether or not I got them wrong in your opinion is of no consequence, again. I asked a question and instead of having my questions answered. I continue to get berated by 3 separate people, because my views are not in line with yours. You try to turn it around and make me look like that bad guy, for asking simple questions, that I thought someone with religious views would kind enough to answer. I mean, I did answer your question of me. Please, you want to turn this around and question my beliefs go ahead. I will present a defense.

Your question is not relevant. I never said you ''need' Jesus etc. I don't even think that. I really do not care what you worship. It seems like all your questions are wrapped up in this idea that I'm saying you need Jesus as a savior, which first off I didn't even say, then you presented a list of quasi-historical Jesus like figures //according to you/, and thought that is supposed to mean something? Do you know how much of this ''accepted'' research is totally wrong? The point is, you haven't presented an argument against the OP. It's a strawman, like I said.

 

[Yes]

Correct, you have. But @disciple , instead of engaging me in discussion/debate. Has instead been bashing me, for unintentionally misrepresenting his OP. Even though the OP is insanely vague, and nondescript.

I get treated that way too much of the time.

 

[Desert Snake]

Correct, you have. But @disciple , instead of engaging me in discussion/debate. Has instead been bashing me, for unintentionally misrepresenting his OP. Even though the OP is insanely vague, and nondescript.

Lol the OP isn't vague at all. It's as non-vague as I could possibly write it.

 

[Desert Snake]

People think there is some process to go through, but it isn't the case. All one has to do is accept Jesus, and their saved. No magic ceremonies required.

Thanks

This is the OP. It isn't ''vague''. Granted, it may not be your flavor of xianity, is that my problem?

 

[The Hammer]

Your question is not relevant. I never said you ''need' Jesus etc. I don't even think that. I really do not care what you worship. It seems like all your questions are wrapped up in this idea that I'm saying you need Jesus as a savior, which first off I didn't even say, then you presented a list of quasi-historical Jesus like figures //according to you/, and thought that is supposed to mean something? Do you know how much of this ''accepted'' research is totally wrong? The point is, you haven't presented an argument against the OP. It's a strawman, like I said.

I was never intending to argue against the OP.

You realize that I believe Jesus existed right? You realize that I was asking questions, solely for the purpose of discussion right? You realize that this entire time, you have spent attacking me, I have never once attacked you or said that your views are wrong, or that jesus did not exist, or that he wasn't a path to salvation.

You are reading way too much into my intentions, because I questioned you. That's a very revealing character trait.

 

[The Hammer]

Lol the OP isn't vague at all. It's as non-vague as I could possibly write it.

Then you may need to brush up on your writing, because I see it as vague. And you mentioned that I am not the only person who misinterpreted it. So if it's not just me, it's the writing style.

 

[Desert Snake]

Then you may need to brush up on your writing, because I see it as vague. And you mentioned that I am not the only person who misinterpreted it. So if it's not just me, it's the writing style.

No, it has nothing to do with my ''writing style''. Some people disagree with the theology, that is the main source of criticism.

 

[Mequa]

God designed us to be skeptical. he knows what it would take to convince us and he has infinite power. If he cares about belief, why not just re arrange the stars in aramaic to write Yahweh is here?

That would spoil the fun of such a capricious deity, who does not reveal himself through such direct empirical evidence, but demands blind faith... in the words of those who claim to represent him.

Those who rely on the empirical evidence and will not take such a blind leap of faith, get tortured forever. But hey, he makes the rules, an ant can't complain about the ant farmer.

You know, it's almost as if such a capricious deity was invented as the mouthpiece of such people who claim to represent him, to add authority to their unsubstantiated dogmas by placing them into the mouth of the supposed God of the Universe. What does their deity want people to do? Blindly believe and trust in the words of such people based on the authority of religious leaders.

You would think an omnipotent deity could at least have summoned up a better PR department, if presenting enough hard empirical evidence to convince any empiricist (such as by writing his name in the stars) is beyond him. But ah well, one cannot question the wisdom of the Lord, so goes the last line of defence.

 

[The Hammer]

I'll show you what is actually going on..

Many people do believe there is a process to go through. This 'process' can vary from church to church, denomination to denomination.
Many disagree with this, even when it is assumed one also has to accept the teachings of Jesus. Again, church tradition etc. all plays into arguments against this statement.
Even this is a statement of contention. Many believe that certain ceremonies like baptism are literally 'changing' the person, if they think this comment falls under this category(ies), it's a subject for argument

Holy cow! The entire OP makes sense now .

But... That does not invalidate my question of "Why Jesus, in the first place?". This still sounds like a "Same-Faith Debate" to me. As you are getting upset when someone who does not believe in Jesus as a necessary component to be saved, responds and asks, supposedly off OP questions. Even though this is a completely open debate forum that you posted in.

 

[serp777]

Totally incorrect.

Well, yeah, because it's wrong.

That's some extreme made up position of some church adherents, it's not biblical at all.

Uh......right. o.k. Well, if you are talking about Jesus sacrificing Himself in order to forgive the sins of Adam, totally wrong! Jesus sacrificed Himself for the sins of His followers, has nothing to do with ''''''''''original sin'''''''''''''''''''//just some church term, it's irrelevant here.

So then you're agreeing with me over the fact that we don't need to be saved right? if so then what's your point? We both have the same conclusion that accepting Jesus doesn't save us but your interpretation of Christianity is different.

So its only totally incorrect based on your particular interpretation. And actually much of the bible does talk about how we are born with sins, particularly the Psalms and other texts, so its not just an invention from the church. it was one of their interpretations which does have some validity according to a variety of theologians, although I admit there are no church authorities and it is completely up to interpretation. Still its not just some extreme church position.

And when people talk about Jesus saving us, its usually because he's saving us from original sin, which is what i'm referring to. Furthermore, committing suicide essentially for the sake of his 100 followers or however many he had at the time is pretty pointless anyways, and he's still acting as a scapegoat in order to forgive the sins of his followers, in order to save his followers from himself. Still incomprehensible.

 

[serp777]

That would spoil the fun of such a capricious deity, who does not reveal himself through such direct empirical evidence, but demands blind faith... in the words of those who claim to represent him.

Those who rely on the empirical evidence and will not take such a blind leap of faith, get tortured forever. But hey, he makes the rules, an ant can't complain about the ant farmer.

You know, it's almost as if such a capricious deity was invented as the mouthpiece of such people who claim to represent him, to add authority to their unsubstantiated dogmas by placing them into the mouth of the supposed God of the Universe. What does their deity want people to do? Blindly believe and trust in the words of such people based on the authority of religious leaders.

You would think an omnipotent deity could at least have summoned up a better PR department, if presenting enough hard empirical evidence to convince any empiricist (such as by writing his name in the stars) is beyond him. But ah well, one cannot question the wisdom of the Lord, so goes the last line of defence.

God works in mysterious ways right? A common counter argument I see from xians is that we cannot understand the divine plan and so even though it makes no sense to us, the plan is just too complex for us to understand because its God's plan. convenient plan right? Now xians don't have to explain anything!

You would think if God loved us and cared about what we believed then he would just perform a few miracles in a laboratory setting, or just rearrange the stars so that we would all just believe, no problem! Instead of theology God could make himself science. I would sure become a Christian then and be in church every day. Either he doesn't care about us believing, or he's setting us up for the ultimate entrapment scenario.

 

[Desert Snake]

So then you're agreeing with me over the fact that we don't need to be saved right? if so then what's your point? We both have the same conclusion that accepting Jesus doesn't save us but your interpretation of Christianity is different.

Well, didn't say that. I think that the word 'saved' has different meanings, that's all.

So its only totally incorrect based on your particular interpretation. And actually much of the bible does talk about how we are born with sins, particularly the Psalms and other texts, so its not just an invention from the church. it was one of their interpretations which does have some validity according to a variety of theologians, although I admit there are no church authorities and it is completely up to interpretation. Still its not just some extreme church position.

And when people talk about Jesus saving us, its usually because he's saving us from original sin, which is what i'm referring to. Furthermore, committing suicide essentially for the sake of his 100 followers or however many he had at the time is pretty pointless anyways, and he's still acting as a scapegoat in order to forgive the sins of his followers, in order to save his followers from himself. Still incomprehensible.

Well, they're theory doesn't make sense. If I thought that's what Xianity''/ believed I'd drop it too. The 'sacrifice' is actually for all His adherents, not just those who knew Him personally in Israel. It's metaphoric, if you want to view it that way. I don't know what that original sin stuff is, makes no sense, Jesus as Adam makes even less sense. Look, Xians disagree with me left and right, so, who knows. I don't know what there teaching in churches, I don't attend church.

 

[serp777]

Jesus is the Greatest Love ever known. You would not know that if he had not come to earth and died for us.


How do you get that you are expected to just know the answer when I told you to get Jesus' teachings and obey them?


I am explaining it to you, and I am telling you how to get understanding.


The Apostles obeyed Jesus. Jesus told his Apostles to obey his teachings and then he would reveal himself to them See John 14:21.


The Father and Jesus make their home with those who love them by obeying, Those are the people Jesus reveals himself.

We have to prepare our hearts for Jesus to live in our hearts.

I can think of many better ways for Jesus to let us know. he didn't have to die. Are you telling me God could not have come up with a better plan? One that didn't involve a sadistic suicide?

Also i was a devout Christian at one point because I was raised that way, and I truly feared God. i was worried about thought crimes and everything. I obeyed and followed all the rituals, and yet understanding didn't just magically pop into my head. So I guess your theory is wrong right?

Also the bible frequently convinces people though miracles so you're wrong again:

"Exodus 14:18,31 - The ultimate goal of the parting of the Sea was that God might gain honor, so the people would fear the Lord and believe in Him."

"Joshua 4:22-24 - God caused the Jordan to stop flowing, so Israel could pass on dry ground. This gave people reason to fear the Lord as God forever."

"* Lazarus - John 11:47,48. After Jesus raised Lazarus, His enemies admitted He did many miracles."

"
* Lame man - Acts 4:10,14-16. After Peter & John healed the lame man (3:1-10), the Jewish opponents admitted it was a great miracle.

* Saul of Tarsus - Acts 9:1-18. After His resurrection, Jesus appeared to the persecutor Saul to convince Him of the resurrection."

Why can't I get some evidence? Clearly the father and Jesus are totally okay with understanding first, then obedience. They didn't expect these ancient superstitious people to believe, so why expect a skeptical 21st century scientist ,who knows a variety of different religions, to believe? That's completely unfair.

 

[serp777]

Well, they're theory doesn't make sense. If I thought that's what Xianity''/ believed I'd drop it too. The 'sacrifice' is actually for all His adherents, not just those who knew Him personally in Israel. It's metaphoric, if you want to view it that way. I don't know what that original sin stuff is, makes no sense, Jesus as Adam makes even less sense. Look, Xians disagree with me left and right, so, who knows. I don't know what there teaching in churches, I don't attend church.

Well okay that's fair. You're obviously a lot more reasonable compared to the other people here. I'm willing to accept that its a meaningful story, but that it didn't actually happen. So are you a deist who reads the bible for moral guidelines?

 

[Desert Snake]

Well okay that's fair. You're obviously a lot more reasonable compared to the other people here. I'm willing to accept that its a meaningful story, but that it didn't actually happen. So are you like a deist who reads the bible for moral guidelines?

Hmm that's a good question. Have to think about that one actually. Because then were talking about Deity concepts.

 

[Desert Snake]

I don't believe 'theist' has to be limited to church specific ideas of deity.

 

[The Hammer]

I don't believe 'theist' has to be limited to church specific ideas of deity.

This I agree with. But I am a Polytheistic Monist apparently, so what do I know?

 

[Desert Snake]

This I agree with. But I am a Polytheistic Monist apparently, so what do I know?

Monist means no thors hammer.