Say what? I've read or been told this my entire life, but I have yet to grasp it, let alone accept it. What does it mean? Am I just stupid? Have I simply never had it correctly explained, or is it an inherently illogical concept?

Approximately 2000 years ago, a man we call Jesus supposedly lived and ended up dieing a terribly painful death. Before this, he is said to have demonstrated miraculous power that proved he was the son of god. I have my doubts, because I would expect the son of god to eliminate blindness, not simply cure a blind woman. He would feed the world, not a village. However, for the purposes of this discussion I will assume Jesus was indeed both god and man.

Slow, painful death in any form is a sad and pitiful thing in my eyes, whether it befalls a godman or an insect; but this death is said to hold special signifigance. This death served to erase the sins of humankind so we could avoid an afterlife of fire and brimstone away from the presence of god. Am I to believe that blood sacrifice is a valid means to make up for bad things I've done in my life? I don't care who it is or what it is or how stainless a life that sacrifice led, spilling blood on an altar does not a sin purifying ritual make. Whether it's a jew ripping off a dove's head, a Greek slitting a hundred bull's throats for Zeus, a Mayan ripping the heart out of virgin, or Romans nailing a jew to timber, blood sacrifice is only further sin.

In my eyes, the only way to 'purify sin', or, more accurately, make up for the bad things that are weighing on your conscience, is to realize the gravity of what you've done, feel remorse, cease the 'sinful' activity, and work to do good in the future. Anything else is masturbation.

True believers, I genuinely mean no offense. Although I don't believe, I am very interested in how you wrap your minds around the concept of sacrifice. Please discuss.

quote:Originally posted by SmokeWhiskey:

Say what? I've read or been told this my entire life, but I have yet to grasp it, let alone accept it. What does it mean? Am I just stupid? Have I simply never had it correctly explained, or is it an inherently illogical concept?

If you acknowledge that Jesus died for your sins, and accept that belief into your heart along with Him as your savior. You are acknowledging a faith [in Him]. Consequently, you will be absolved and safe from damnnation.

quote:Originally posted by SmokeWhiskey:

I would expect the son of god to eliminate blindness, not simply cure a blind woman. He would feed the world, not a village.

He cures those that believe in Him. Yes some nonbelievers were healed, but they tended to accept Him afterwards.

Some people on the Earth have never even heard the name "Jesus Christ".

quote:Originally posted by SmokeWhiskey:

Slow, painful death in any form is a sad and pitiful thing in my eyes, whether it befalls a godman or an insect; but this death is said to hold special signifigance. This death served to erase the sins of humankind so we could avoid an afterlife of fire and brimstone away from the presence of god. Am I to believe that blood sacrifice is a valid means to make up for bad things I've done in my life?

Again, it comes back to faith. God doesn't care what you've done. He cares that you trust in Him.

quote:Originally posted by SmokeWhiskey:

In my eyes, the only way to 'purify sin', or, more accurately, make up for the bad things that are weighing on your conscience, is to realize the gravity of what you've done, feel remorse, cease the 'sinful' activity, and work to do good in the future. Anything else is masturbation.

I agree. The Christian religion however, does not.

quote:Originally posted by SmokeWhiskey:

True believers, I genuinely mean no offense. Although I don't believe, I am very interested in how you wrap your minds around the concept of sacrifice.

Me too.



[This message has been edited by Goat Saint (edited 09-05-2005).]

what he said

L Ron Hubbarb (http://www.xenu.net) died for our sins.

I'm not big on the religion thing but think about how he died. The way described is a way that no real human being could have live through. If in fact a man survived through that it must mean something. This may not necesarily have a connection with him dying for our sins but him dying for our sins means he through death is forgiving us as a people for all the wrongdoings we do and accepts that we are not perfect but he still loves us. I'm a catholic but I'm not very big on all the stories and things that happened in the bible so I'm not sure if what I said made sense. Sorry if I just rambled.

What you are referring to is Karma. You kill somebody in this life, and in the next life you must reparate or die as a consequence of your actions (of course, taking the fact that this was not an accident and you did this crime, or any crime for that matter, with your intent).

quote:Originally posted by SilentOp47:

If in fact a man survived through that it must mean something.But, he didn't survive. Therefore...

quote:Originally posted by Osiris89:

L Ron Hubbarb (http://www.xenu.net) died for our sins.

Lron aint dead hes in another galaxy taking care of buissiness . He just went on a buissiness trip for your sins . L RON IS TAKI'N CARE OF BUISSINESS EVERY DAY , L RON'S TAKI'N CARE OF BUISSINESS EVERY WAY .

I don’t believe an all power being would be capable of sacrifice. The Christian God did not need to send a part of it’s self to die to allow people to go to heaven. It could have snapped it’s fingers and caused the new faith= heaven after death system, instead it sent a part of it’s self to die and then snapped it's fingers to bring about the new system. There is no real sacrifice involved. God is never any less powerful and it in fact has it’s son returned from hell in 3 days anyways. What has God lost or sacrificed? It has only used it’s power in a less direct way to bring about what it desires. If there was some physical law that some how meant that the sacrifice of God’s son caused the new system and God could not cause the new system without exploiting this physical law then a sacrifice might be said to exist, but this would a completely different god. What we would then have is a god that did not create the laws of the universe and a god that is not omnipotent. What we would have would not be the Christian God as this would contradict the Christian definition of God. Therefore, one can conclude that the omnipotent, omniscient, benevolent Christian God is not compatible with Jesus’ sacrifice and as a contradiction cannot exist, the Christian God does not exist.

-The old system involved sacrificing animals to atone for one’s sin’s as opposed to simply having faith in God and having one’s sins atoned for



[This message has been edited by Perspicacious (edited 09-07-2005).]

God died for all our sins. Therefore homosexuality will not get you disbarred from Heaven if you believe in Jesus. This fact alone pisses a lot of christians off because it doesn't give them a free pass to condemn those who are different.

A question that is somewhat off the mark here, but I'll post it anyway.

Do you think that if not for the gospel telling of the crucifixion, that the practice of crucifying would be as well known today...or might it have discretely faded into the past?

The focus on Jesus being crucified without also being acutely aware that many more were crucified in much the same way rather rubs me the wrong way.

He was a man who suffered...like many others...

First you must understand sin and what sin is to God. The core of sin is selfishness, greed. All sins (lust, murder, stealing, lying, etc.) are a result of our selfcentered nature. Because of this, all humans are sinners. Jesus, because he was the son of God, was the exception. He lived his entire life in selflessness, without desire, thus he was sinless.

The penalty for sin is death. Not death of the body, death of the soul. The soul is everlasting, therefore it has 2 options once the body has expired: everlasting life, or everlasting death. Why can't God, with his magical god-powers, just let sinners into heaven? Because to allow sin into heaven would defile it. Only the sinless are allowed into heaven so that heaven remains sinless. Now again, the way God sees things is: You sin, therefore your soul is that of a sinner and condemned to hell. OMG, what the fuck do you do?

Jesus, because he was and will be the only man that never sinned, was the only man ever to earn everlasting life. His purpose was to die for the sins of all men. So God basically cast all the condemnation of all those sins on the soul of Christ. God had to look away from Jesus when this happened, thus Jesus cried "My God My God, why have you forsaken me???" or something like that. Then Jesus died for the sins of man. But since Jesus is the son of God and weilds super powers, he rose from the dead with a clean soul.

So everyone has had their sins cast on Jesus who died for them. Next is the whole salvation bit. Since Jesus already paid the penalty for all sins ever to be committed, that meant anyone could now get into heaven. But first they must acknowledge that they are in fact a sinner. Then they ask God for forgivness of their sins, and because Jesus already died for them, God just writes the sins off and from that point on, that person's soul is clean in God's eyes.

This is a hard concept to explain, probably harder for a skeptic to grasp. Feel free to ask questions, pick through everything. But I have to remind you: the root of Christianity, and all religions of the world, is blind faith. I can explain where that blind faith is supposed to go, but there is no physical proof that it is even the right way to go.

I believe in religion because it is the logical thing to do. http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif) (I'll probably have to explain this too)

he died for our sins?

and there was me thinking he died cos he pissed off the roman and jewish authorities...

quote:Originally posted by jackketch:

he died for our sins?

and there was me thinking he died cos he pissed off the roman and jewish authorities...

Which is why he let them capture him. It didn't have to happen. He knew Judas would betray him. He knew the people would choose to kill him. He had every chance in the world to flee and he didn't. So he wasn't 'killed' by Romans or Jews, he laid down his own life, by his own terms, his own will to die.

quote:So he wasn't 'killed' by Romans or Jews, he laid down his own life, by his own terms, his own will to die.

sounds a lot like suicide to me...

anyway thanks for the unnecessary half arsed explantion of evangelical bibliology. if you ever progress in your study of the bible you may some day realise just how wrong what you wrote is.

quote:Originally posted by jackketch:

sounds a lot like suicide to me...

anyway thanks for the unnecessary half arsed explantion of evangelical bibliology. if you ever progress in your study of the bible you may some day realise just how wrong what you wrote is.

In a way it was suicide, only we like the term "self-sacrifice".

And please enlighten me, bible scholar. http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif)

Jesus died cause he was a fucking communist and a Jew. We should just kill all communists/Jews. Make the world a better fucking place.

Which is why he let them capture him. It didn't have to happen. He knew Judas would betray him. He knew the people would choose to kill him. He had every chance in the world to flee and he didn't. So he wasn't 'killed' by Romans or Jews, he laid down his own life, by his own terms, his own will to die.[/B][/QUOTE]

No, they killed him. Just cause he didn't run away, doesn't change the fact that he was killed. He didnt' commit suicide (a sin).

quote:Originally posted by Aeon:

No, they killed him. Just cause he didn't run away, doesn't change the fact that he was killed. He didnt' commit suicide (a sin).

Yeah, they killed him, but he let them kill him. He could have used his uber powers and not have died. He proved this by (supposedly) rising from the dead 3 days later, which he told everyone he would do.

quote:Originally posted by Elephantitis Man:

I believe in religion because it is the logical thing to do. http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif) (I'll probably have to explain this too)

Please do.

I'm going to sound like an athiest broken record, but here goes.



-All sins (lust, murder, stealing, lying, etc.) are a result of our selfcentered nature.

God created us this way. We have no choice but to be nasty, ignorant, hateful humans.

-Jesus, because he was the son of God, was the exception.

No fair. When was the son of god lottery held? How did I miss it?

-The penalty for sin is death.

God could make the penalty anything. If he's omnibenevolent, everlasting fiery torment is not an option.

-Why can't God, with his magical god-powers, just let sinners into heaven? Because to allow sin into heaven would defile it.

God and his magical god-powers could make it so heaven isn't defiled by sin, or a way to purify a soul without fire and brimstone, or he isn't a god! If there's one thing I've learned in all my years of watching Stargate SG-1, it's that limited powers don't make you a god.

-God basically cast all the condemnation of all those sins on the soul of Christ.

He could have cast the condemnation on an orange. Or not at all, being a god and all.

-Then Jesus died for the sins of man.

This is where I'm hung up. Nothing happened to the sins of man. Jesus died. That's it. If God was serious to begin with, everyone still deserves their eternity in hell sentence.

-God just writes the sins off and from that point on, that person's soul is clean in God's eyes.

God could write the sins off with repentence and ceasing the sin. He could write it off any way imaginable (and many ways not imaginable). Why torture some poor jew to death?

-This is a hard concept to explain, probably harder for a skeptic to grasp.

I think I grasp it. I just reject it with every fiber of my being.

-the root of Christianity, and all religions of the world, is blind faith.

You're absolutely right, but for one exception. There is one 'religion' with its root in logic, causality, and personal verification: Buddhism.



[This message has been edited by SmokeWhiskey (edited 09-09-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by Twisted_Ferret:

Originally posted by Elephantitis Man:

I believe in religion because it is the logical thing to do. http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif) (I'll probably have to explain this too)

Please do.

Ok. For starters, nobody knows the origin of life. All we have is theories, some based on current science, some based on beliefs handed down generation after generation, some thought up by people in mental institutions, etc. The existence of the human soul is something that has not (and I don't think ever will be) proven or disproven. So all we humans have is speculation. Life is chance. Because nothing regarding the afterlife is proven or disproven, and no evidence of a spiritual realm exists or does not exist, these things make the process of belief a gamble.

Now examine the consequences of belief/lack thereof, considering that the soul could in fact exist.

First off, if the atheist/agnostic was correct if his or her beliefs, the soul is non-existence and a being ceases to be when their body dies. Now the person who believes in the existence of an eternal soul (what I meant when I first mentioned 'religion') dies, they have really lost nothing. What are their consequences for being wrong? Aside from whatever restraint they may have made upon themselves in life based on their beliefs, nothing.

Now we look at the alternative, the soul does exist. When the religious person dies, perhaps their soul goes to a heaven, a hell, roams a spiritual realm, or is reincarnated into another physical creature. The athiest/agnostic was wrong; what are the consequences of this? It could vary from eternal damnation to being reincarnated as a disfigured creature, to who knows what.

The point of the matter is, whether the soul exists or not, whether the agnostic or the Christian or the Buddhist is right, there are consequences to everyones beliefs. Considering that disbelief in the soul provides for an equal or worse consequence (never greater), it is in a person's best interest to realize they may have a soul inside of them and to form beliefs as to what may become of their soul after they die.

Off topic, but was asked.

[This message has been edited by Elephantitis Man (edited 09-09-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by Elephantitis Man:

Ok. For starters, nobody knows the origin of life. All we have is theories, some based on current science, some based on beliefs handed down generation after generation, some thought up by people in mental institutions, etc. The existence of the human soul is something that has not (and I don't think ever will be) proven or disproven. So all we humans have is speculation. Life is chance. Because nothing regarding the afterlife is proven or disproven, and no evidence of a spiritual realm exists or does not exist, these things make the process of belief a gamble.

Now examine the consequences of belief/lack thereof, considering that the soul could in fact exist.

First off, if the atheist/agnostic was correct if his or her beliefs, the soul is non-existence and a being ceases to be when their body dies. Now the person who believes in the existence of an eternal soul (what I meant when I first mentioned 'religion') dies, they have really lost nothing. What are their consequences for being wrong? Aside from whatever restraint they may have made upon themselves in life based on their beliefs, nothing.

Now we look at the alternative, the soul does exist. When the religious person dies, perhaps their soul goes to a heaven, a hell, roams a spiritual realm, or is reincarnated into another physical creature. The athiest/agnostic was wrong; what are the consequences of this? It could vary from eternal damnation to being reincarnated as a disfigured creature, to who knows what.

The point of the matter is, whether the soul exists or not, whether the agnostic or the Christian or the Buddhist is right, there are consequences to everyones beliefs. Considering that disbelief in the soul provides for an equal or worse consequence (never greater), it is in a person's best interest to realize they may have a soul inside of them and to form beliefs as to what may become of their soul after they die.

Off topic, but was asked.



Yes, Pascal's Wager is easily the most convincing argument for theism; however, there is no way to choose the correct religion. 3 to 1 odds on Jesus? What if Islam is correct? You still lose the bet even though you chose the safest one.

http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/central.html

quote:Originally posted by SmokeWhiskey:

I'm going to sound like an athiest broken record, but here goes.



-All sins (lust, murder, stealing, lying, etc.) are a result of our selfcentered nature.

God created us this way. We have no choice but to be nasty, ignorant, hateful humans.

God did not create us this way. We were created in good nature, but with free will. At first man was sinless, but Satan tempted him to sin against God. When man sinned, he realized the satisfaction of selfishness and that became the nature of man.

quote:-Jesus, because he was the son of God, was the exception.

No fair. When was the son of god lottery held? How did I miss it?

Jesus was eternal. Even though he was physical born, his soul had already existed in heaven with God, as God. Part of the Trinity.

quote:-The penalty for sin is death.

God could make the penalty anything. If he's omnibenevolent, everlasting fiery torment is not an option. The penalty for sin is death be cause heaven is eternal life. The opposite of life is eternal death.

quote:-Why can't God, with his magical god-powers, just let sinners into heaven? Because to allow sin into heaven would defile it.

God and his magical god-powers could make it so heaven isn't defiled by sin, or a way to purify a soul without fire and brimstone, or he isn't a god! If there's one thing I've learned in all my years of watching Stargate SG-1, it's that limited powers don't make you a god.

The only way to purify a soul without fire and brimstone is removal of free will. Removal of free will makes souls robots, machines, God does not want this. He wants followers who choose to worship him, not that are designed and forced to.

quote:-God basically cast all the condemnation of all those sins on the soul of Christ.

He could have cast the condemnation on an orange. Or not at all, being a god and all.

Oranges don't have souls, they don't know right and wrong, and cannot sin.

quote:-Then Jesus died for the sins of man.

This is where I'm hung up. Nothing happened to the sins of man. Jesus died. That's it. If God was serious to begin with, everyone still deserves their eternity in hell sentence.

Nonono. Before Jesus died, men could still get into heaven, but they had to pay for their sins with a sacrifice (a dove, lamb, etc.) Jesus, by dying for all man, made it so that individual sacrifices for individual sinners was no longer needed because he knew right from wrong and still never did wrong.

[quote]-God just writes the sins off and from that point on, that person's soul is clean in God's eyes.

God could write the sins off with repentence and ceasing the sin. He could write it off any way imaginable (and many ways not imaginable). Why torture some poor jew to death?

No he couldn't. The penalty for sin is death. That means something has to die. No death of Jesus, no forgiveness.

quote:-This is a hard concept to explain, probably harder for a skeptic to grasp.

I think I grasp it. I just reject it with every fiber of my being.

Ummm...good for you?

quote:-the root of Christianity, and all religions of the world, is blind faith.

You're absolutely right, but for one exception. There is one 'religion' with its root in logic, causality, and personal verification: Buddhism.

I like alot of the philosophy of Buddhism too. However don't take Christianity at face value. It may seem simple, primitive, illogical, but in grasping the big picture of it all, it can be very complex and at times, quite believable to those with an open mind.

[/B]

quote:Originally posted by Elephantitis Man:

Originally posted by jackketch:

sounds a lot like suicide to me...

anyway thanks for the unnecessary half arsed explantion of evangelical bibliology. if you ever progress in your study of the bible you may some day realise just how wrong what you wrote is.

In a way it was suicide, only we like the term "self-sacrifice".

And please enlighten me, bible scholar. http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif)



no, i don't do 'enlightenment'....simply because without the background knowledge there's little point in my trying to explain things.

if however you have a genuine interest in furthering your knowledge then i would suggest you start with investigating the whole messianic idea. there's some good stuff in the Dead Sea Scrolls.

and of course there is no better introduction to the field of NT study than John Robinson's seminal work "Redating the NT".

quote:Originally posted by jackketch:

if however you have a genuine interest in furthering your knowledge then i would suggest you start with investigating the whole messianic idea. there's some good stuff in the Dead Sea Scrolls.

and of course there is no better introduction to the field of NT study than John Robinson's seminal work "Redating the NT".

Thanks for the suggestion (I'm being serious too http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)).

Are you refering to Gnosticism, or is this something completely different? http://www.totse.com/bbs/confused.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/confused.gif)

(Forgive me if that question was dumb, I don't know much about gnosticism. I've only heard it mentioned with the Dead Sea scrolls and thought there might be a connection.)

I believe the praise at Jesus's death was because he was a matyr and all matyr's in my opinion should be respected (feared).

quote:Originally posted by Elephantitis Man:

The only way to purify a soul without fire and brimstone is removal of free will. Removal of free will makes souls robots, machines...

So either:

1. There's sin in Heaven and we're back to the same ol' incompetent failed-experiment shit again (Which would explain Lucifer's capability of revolt. Must've been trouble in Paradise for your head Archangel and 1/3'rd of your flock to stage a coup').

2. There is no sin, and we're all a bunch of borg-like drones (http://www.nobeliefs.com/heaven.htm).

3. We're all going to be purified in an eternity of hell.

Thanks for clearing that up.

-God did not create us this way. We were created in good nature, but with free will. At first man was sinless, but Satan tempted him to sin against God. When man sinned, he realized the satisfaction of selfishness and that became the nature of man.

God created Satan, and God knew beforehand that we would fall to temptation; therefore, he created us this way. He had and has every choice in the matter, free will or no.

-Jesus was eternal. Even though he was physical born, his soul had already existed in heaven with God, as God. Part of the Trinity.

I can't argue this. You win this round, Trebek.

-The penalty for sin is death be cause heaven is eternal life. The opposite of life is eternal death.

But eternal torture is not eternal death. I might never have reached my current opinion of Christianity if it weren't for the bloodthirsty, vengeful, heartless nature of eternal damnation without even the hope of oblivion. Besides, like I said, God can make the penalty anything. He's God.

-The only way to purify a soul without fire and brimstone is removal of free will. Removal of free will makes souls robots, machines, God does not want this.

I'd rather be a robot than burn forever!

-He wants followers who choose to worship him, not that are designed and forced to.

Does God ever think about what anyone else wants?

-Oranges don't have souls, they don't know right and wrong, and cannot sin.

God could create an orange with a soul. My point is that he doesn't have to cast condemnation, especially condemnation that noone can learn from. Damned souls can only say shucks, I messed up and now I gotta burn forever.

-No he couldn't. The penalty for sin is death.

God can do anything. Anything less is just an alien-entity with super powers; not worthy of worship.

-No death of Jesus, no forgiveness.

That means God is heartless and has tunnel vision.

-don't take Christianity at face value. It may seem simple, primitive, illogical, but in grasping the big picture of it all, it can be very complex and at times, quite believable to those with an open mind.

Oh, I agree. Anything that has lasted this long has to be deep. The deeper I go; however, the more illogical it gets. Aquinas, Augustine, etc. They just seem to be terrified that they are going to die one day.

quote:Originally posted by Dark_Magneto:

3. We're all going to be purified in an eternity of hell.

That's the problem I see with it - there's no "purification" involved, if it's eternal damnation. Now, tell me God made a provision for all damned sinners to eventually rise up and be purified, and I'd have much less objection to Christianity. But, sadly, this is not the case...

quote:Originally posted by Twisted_Ferret:

That's the problem I see with it - there's no "purification" involved, if it's eternal damnation. Now, tell me God made a provision for all damned sinners to eventually rise up and be purified, and I'd have much less objection to Christianity. But, sadly, this is not the case...

Interesting story.

About 1500 years ago, when the whole "canonical" nonsense was being hammered out by the proto-Catholic church, they were presented with two doomsday documents. One was what would be known as the Revelation of John, while the other was known as the Apocalypse of Peter. Unlike the favored tail in Revelation (which can be debated upon whether it is truly even a doomsday document), the Apocalypse described how, after the world ended in the horrific final battle between Lucifer and God, that all the saved would be allowed into heaven as Peter finally opened the gates.

You may be thinking to yourself, "Wait. This sounds exactly like Revelations. Why's he even bringing this up?" The catch is with the ending, my friend. In Revelation, Hell is created and all the sinners and damned are thrown into the bowels of Hell to burn forever in eternal punishment. In Apocalypse, God plans to do nothing at all with the sinners (in Apocalypse, God doesn't allow Lucifer to live, unlike in Revelations. Lucifer gets the axe along with Beelzebub and the rest). However, Peter sees the sinners wandering the broken Earth. He turns to God and begs him to forgive the sinners, for now that the end has come and their lives are over, it will be an eternity of punishment while they only had a window of 80 years to accept him. Eighty being infinitally smaller than infinity caused God to accept this, and all sinners were cleansed and allowed in heaven.

The fathers of the proto-Church looked at these, scoffed at salvation, and praised the fear effect of Revelation! Afterall, how can you market the urgency of your faith when everyone's going to win in the end anyway?

[This message has been edited by Gorloche (edited 09-09-2005).]

Very interesting. Do you have a source for this? I don't mean that in skeptical way - I would like to believe this, but just in case I have to convince someone else... http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

*Elephantitis Man *



The only way to purify a soul without fire and brimstone is removal of free will. Removal of free will makes souls robots, machines, God does not want this. He wants followers who choose to worship him, not that are designed and forced to.



You realise you have just told us, with certanty, what god wants, his desires in fact.

Firstly, if jesus didnt have any, then would god as trinity have any?

And secondly, WTF! you just told us what an infinte and INEFFABLE being wants.

quote:Originally posted by outcast:

The focus on Jesus being crucified without also being acutely aware that many more were crucified in much the same way rather rubs me the wrong way.

Normally, prisoners were tied with rope and left to asphyxiate. They were hung in such a way that they could not breathe properly. Christ was nailed to the cross, which would obviously be much more painful than being tied up there.

I still don't accept Christianity, but that's what they believe. I'm still pretty skeptical...the power of literature and such.

quote:Originally posted by Twisted_Ferret:

Very interesting. Do you have a source for this? I don't mean that in skeptical way - I would like to believe this, but just in case I have to convince someone else... http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

There's very little I can find, but I did find this:

http:// en.wikiped ia.org/wik i/Apocalypse_of_Paul (http: //en.wikip edia.org/w iki/Apocal ypse_of_Pa ul)

Apparently, I misspoke. It was Paul, not Peter. Peter had a far harsher Hell. Also, note that the translation, often the phrase, "...on the day of the Pnetacost," is included, while in other translations, such a line is omitted. This is due largely to the fact that, while it was fairly knew, many various subsects of Gnostic Christianity made copies, each adding their own flavor. Some have the Virgin going to heaven to visit afterwards, others have her helping the sinners on pentacost, etc. Cultures have made this a little more difficult, giving a logical reason why the Church probably canonized Revelations: It was uniform. Having a multi-translated and differently-interpretted book would ahve provided too difficult a task for the young church to handle.

I have only found one site with the full Apocalypse of Paul, and I will link it.

Link:

Important excerpt: htt p://www.ne wadvent.or g/fathers/ 1005.htm (http: //www.newa dvent.org/ fathers/10 05.htm)

XXIX. Then the Lord, seeing the prayer of the saints, had compassion and said: Go down, my beloved son, and because of the prayer of the saints let thy face shine on earth to sinners. Then the Lord came down from his undefiled throne: and when they saw Him, those who were under chastisement raised one voice saying: Have mercy on us, King of ages. Then the Lord of all things said: Hearken, all ye sinners and righteous men: I made paradise and made man after my image: but he transgressed, and for his own sins was delivered to death: but I did not suffer the works of my hands to be tyrannized over by the serpent: wherefore I bowed the heavens and came down and was born of Mary, the holy undefiled Mother of God, that I might set you free: I was baptised in Jordan in order that I might save the creature (nature) which had grown old under sin: I was nailed to the cross to free you from the ancient curse: I asked for water and ye gave me vinegar mingled with gall: I was laid in the grave: I trampled on the enemy: I raised up mine elect, and even thus ye would not hear me. But now, because of the prayer of my mother Mary, because she has wept much for your sake, and because of Michael my archangel, and because of the multitude of my saints, I grant you to have rest on the day of Pentecost to glorify the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.

[This message has been edited by Gorloche (edited 09-09-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by Gorloche:

This is due largely to the fact that, while it was fairly knew, many various subsects of Gnostic Christianity made copies, each adding their own flavor.

That's exactly why I'm so skeptical of Christianity. How easy would it be for the authors to change several words to slightly similar words? Then another person changes those words to other slightly similar words, and so on, until you have completely different passages than the original. They could've duped us and not even meant to. That would be such a grand con, too.

And East of Eden: the misstranslation. That fucks with a lot of things in my mind. How many more are there? How important are they to the theology? What would Christians do if these things exist and were discovered? If they disproved core aspects of their beliefs?

Just speculation...

Thanks, Gorloche.

It was all a conspiracy,

Really. Really cool one albeit.

quote:In my eyes, the only way to 'purify sin', or, more accurately, make up for the bad things that are weighing on your conscience, is to realize the gravity of what you've done, feel remorse, cease the 'sinful' activity, and work to do good in the future. Anything else is masturbation.

There are some things wrong here. Let usconsider for arguments sake that the Bible is true. Your philosophy earns you a ticket to hell.

On the other hand, if you could get to heaven by your own works, why was it necessary for Jesus to die?

quote:Originally posted by Dead Helmsman:

Originally posted by SilentOp47:

If in fact a man survived through that it must mean something.But, he didn't survive. Therefore...



he came back to life 3 days later...

quote:Originally posted by ArgonPlasma2000:

There are some things wrong here. Let usconsider for arguments sake that the Bible is true. Your philosophy earns you a ticket to hell.

On the other hand, if you could get to heaven by your own works, why was it necessary for Jesus to die?

Actually, for the most part, I think he's correct.

Sins are usually committed against man as well as God. The OT was pretty specific about the clearing up of arguments and wrong-doings before entering into the presence of God. I don't think the NT changed that, nor did the death of Jesus. If one cannot do that first then there is no evidence of true repentance. Of what use is repenting without evidence, except it be self-serving of falsely washing one's conscience.

Isn't it written that one should have a contrite heart? How else can that be applied without at least an attempt at atonement between people?

To feel contrition is not enough...but rather...it must be a starting point toward atonement between people.

quote:Originally posted by King_Cotton:

Normally, prisoners were tied with rope and left to asphyxiate. They were hung in such a way that they could not breathe properly. Christ was nailed to the cross, which would obviously be much more painful than being tied up there.

I still don't accept Christianity, but that's what they believe. I'm still pretty skeptical...the power of literature and such.

Archeological evidence for ancient crucifixion

Despite the fact that the ancient Jewish historian Josephus, as well as other sources, refer to the crucifixion of thousands of people by the Romans, there is only a single archeological discovery of a crucified body, dating back to the Roman Empire around the time of Jesus. It is not surprising that there is only one such discovery, because a crucified body was usually left to decay on the cross and therefore would not be preserved. The only reason these archeological remains were preserved was because family members gave this particular crucified criminal a customary burial.

The remains were found accidentally in an ossuary with the crucified man’s name on it, “Yehohanan, the son of Hagakol.” The ossuary contained a heel with a nail driven through its side, indicating that the heels may have been driven through the sides of the tree (one on the left side, one on the right side, and not with both feet together in front). The nail had olive wood on it indicating that he was crucified not on a beam but on an olive tree. Since olive trees are not very tall, this would suggest that victims were crucified at eye level. His legs were found broken.

Important references for the ancient practice of crucifixion and an examination of archeological evidence:

* Tzaferis, Vassilios. “Crucifixion -- The Archaeological Evidence.” Biblical Archaeology Review 11, February, 1985: 44–53.

* Zias, Joseph. “The Crucified Man from Giv’at Ha-Mivtar: A Reappraisal.” Israel Exploration Journal 35(1), 1985: 22–27.



From: http://tinyurl.com/79rqh

Also, read this:

http://tinyurl.com/bws3c

quote:Originally posted by outcast:

Actually, for the most part, I think he's correct.

Sins are usually committed against man as well as God. The OT was pretty specific about the clearing up of arguments and wrong-doings before entering into the presence of God. I don't think the NT changed that, nor did the death of Jesus. If one cannot do that first then there is no evidence of true repentance. Of what use is repenting without evidence, except it be self-serving of falsely washing one's conscience.

Isn't it written that one should have a contrite heart? How else can that be applied without at least an attempt at atonement between people?

To feel contrition is not enough...but rather...it must be a starting point toward atonement between people.



Doesnt matter.

His salvation method was that of works, which is wrong according to the Bible.

I'm not too sure about the 'Christ died for my sins' doctrine.

That Jesus died [i]because of mans sinfulness [or, rather, man's inhumanity toward man] makes much more sense to me.

That might have been expressing Jesus's devotion to God and his disciples though. Kind of like acknowledging that he died fully devoted to God and what he was doing, serving as an inspiration for others to live with the same dedication to God and living righteously?

I'm still unsure about this though...

But, it seems more practical to look at it that way.

Jesus was said to have done great works...as did his followers, who he said would do even greater works...

But Jesus emphasized that loving God and others was the most important thing of all. That his great works were accomplished thru that recripical relationship between himself and God...thus it was not the works...but rather the relationship that was important. Without the relationship the works were nothing...just as in doing good without the power behind it for others to see, does not go very far.

He was disappointed that many did not see that power that moves thru things...

That's kind of my take on it anyway.

quote:Originally posted by ArgonPlasma2000:

Doesnt matter.

His salvation method was that of works, which is wrong according to the Bible.



No...he did not mention 'salvation'...only the means to correct what wrongs one does:

"In my eyes, the only way to 'purify sin', or, more accurately, make up for the bad things that are weighing on your conscience, is to realize the gravity of what you've done, feel remorse, cease the 'sinful' activity, and work to do good in the future. Anything else is masturbation."

I don't see any mention of salvation there.

It means christ died because you touch yourself at night.

quote:Originally posted by SmokeWhiskey:

'Christ died for my sins.'

Dont lie, jesus was a magician just look at family guy.

Jesus is not God. David said, "The LORD said to my LORD sit you here at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool." Adonai, is PLURAL, not singular.

God created man to walk and talk and to be with him. He created Adam and Adam stood for all of mankind. God told Adam, "Have dominion, tend to the tree of Knowledge of good and evil, but DON'T EAT OF IT." That was the only thing he had to do, NOT EAT OF THE TREE. Then Eve was created, and the Devil came along tempting her, and she said, "God said not to eat OR TOUCH (lie) of this tree, or we will surely die."

God didn't say don't touch. He said not to eat. She ate of it, seeing it did nothing to her and then influenced Adam to do likewise. Adam seen she didn't die, so he did it, and when he did, they died spiritually instantly. It's known as 'the fall of man'.

Then God made a convenant with Abraham, and eventually, through the bloodline of David, and Abraham brought forth the Messiah, Jesus the Christ. To reverse what Adam had done. To redeem mankind. Because of Adam, we were slaves to our flesh, but Jesus broke the chains of bondage, and bridged the great divide between God and man, so that we can be washed in the Pure blood of the flawless lamb, and come BOLDLY TO the throne room of Grace, by Jesus, The Christ. This is why his death burial and ressurection are so important. When Jesus rose, (Jesus is the head) It wasn't just the head that rose from the dead, but the WHOLE BODY of Christ, and we are the body. The Veil was rent (torn) so that we were able to come to God. As soon as Jesus' blood hit that mercy seat, as a sacrifice for atonement of sins.

You should try reading the bible, OT and NT, To understand.

quote:Originally posted by HellzShellz:

Jesus is not God. David said, "The LORD said to my LORD sit you here at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool." Adonai, is PLURAL, not singular.

God created man to walk and talk and to be with him. He created Adam and Adam stood for all of mankind. God told Adam, "Have dominion, tend to the tree of Knowledge of good and evil, but DON'T EAT OF IT." That was the only thing he had to do, NOT EAT OF THE TREE. Then Eve was created, and the Devil came along tempting her, and she said, "God said not to eat OR TOUCH (lie) of this tree, or we will surely die."

God didn't say don't touch. He said not to eat. She ate of it, seeing it did nothing to her and then influenced Adam to do likewise. Adam seen she didn't die, so he did it, and when he did, they died spiritually instantly. It's known as 'the fall of man'.

Then God made a convenant with Abraham, and eventually, through the bloodline of David, and Abraham brought forth the Messiah, Jesus the Christ. To reverse what Adam had done. To redeem mankind. Because of Adam, we were slaves to our flesh, but Jesus broke the chains of bondage, and bridged the great divide between God and man, so that we can be washed in the Pure blood of the flawless lamb, and come BOLDLY TO the throne room of Grace, by Jesus, The Christ. This is why his death burial and ressurection are so important. When Jesus rose, (Jesus is the head) It wasn't just the head that rose from the dead, but the WHOLE BODY of Christ, and we are the body. The Veil was rent (torn) so that we were able to come to God. As soon as Jesus' blood hit that mercy seat, as a sacrifice for atonement of sins.

You should try reading the bible, OT and NT, To understand.



That is MEAT right there people!

However, I doubt I'll ever understand. I've beaten my head against the OT & NT plenty. I can never accept blood sacrifice as atonement for anything.

Why would you call Jesus' death a SACRIFICE?

When you sacrifice something, you give up something good, for the sake of others.

But, Jesus did not do that, instead he died, so that He can leave this troubled Earth for the comfort of his home, Heaven. What a pantsy-ass! Why didn't He just stay behind and help out? There's lots of people needing him right now, sure He can go around and help them.



[This message has been edited by quasicurus (edited 09-29-2005).]

people used to have to scarafice animals on behalf of their sins, but since jesus died, hsi blood "balances" out the scale of adams sinning, thus us not needing to scarafice animals - just need to repent.

quote:Originally posted by john_deer:

people used to have to scarafice animals on behalf of their sins, but since jesus died, hsi blood "balances" out the scale of adams sinning, thus us not needing to scarafice animals - just need to repent.

So, Jesus died for that only? For the sake of those poor lambs? He died so that the lambs won't be slaughtered by us? BUGGER!

quote:Originally posted by SmokeWhiskey:

That is MEAT right there people!

However, I doubt I'll ever understand. I've beaten my head against the OT & NT plenty. I can never accept blood sacrifice as atonement for anything.

The 'sacrifice'came from the covenant God had with Abraham. However, the Sacrifices really came about when Moses, when he came down from the mountain with the 10 commandments, after God had delivered Israel out of bondage from the egyptians, and he came down from the mountain to see the people God had just delivered from bondage worshipping a cow they had constructed with their own hands.

God told promised Abraham that he would be the father of many nations.

This is going to get deep too.

Of course first two of the 10 commandments are..

1. You shall have no other Gods before me

2. You shall not make unto you any graven image.

Of course God knew they were to sin again, but he made a way for them to get forgiveness of their sins.

Exodus 20:24 An altar of earth thou shalt make unto me, and shalt sacrifice thereon thy burnt offerings, and thy peace offerings, thy sheep, and thine oxen: in all places where I record my name I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee.

Exodus 29:14 But the flesh of the bullock, and his skin, and his dung, shalt thou burn with fire without the camp: it is a sin offering.

There were different animals for different things, and they all had to be without spot*, without blemish*.

I don't know what was up with the Jews, but all throughout the OT they continues to forsake God and go back to the ways of the gentiles. With the worshipping of Ba'al.



**Remember how the covenant began, with Abraham, "I will make you the father of many nations."**

Ruth, wasn't a Jew but because of her faithfulness to God, she was blessed by God that Chist might come thorugh the bloodline of her son. God loves all people, he just wanted us to be faithful to him and he didn't want us to perish, so he made a way, always for us.

Seeing that this world was doom to sin, and forsake the ways of God, he remembered his servants, Abraham, Issac, Jacob, David, and so on.

Hebrews 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

David Prophecied of the coming of Christ, in Fact the whole OT leads up to Christ, as was promised. Christ was the final Sacrifice. Without Blemish, without flaw, that through him ALL mankind could be saved.

People were still held captive to the desires and lust of their own flesh, because of Adam. We were still bound to sin.

Now, Christ being the final sacrifice, the reason why God told Jeremiah to put the Ark the of Covenant away, the reason why the veil was rent, was so that ALL might BELIEVE on him and be saved. God didn't send Jesus with a sign on his head that said, "I'm the messiah, the one who's to be a final sacrifice for the atonement of sin." No, but he gave the Jews the whole OT, leading up to him,and the signs of his coming, what he will do. He fulfilled the OT, but the Jews were religious minded, like alot of the churches are today. The Old Covenant had to be fulfilled, just as the New one does.

As it begun with Abraham, "I will make you the father of many nations." When Jesus died and rose again, that was it. The NT had began and the OT was fulfilled. Of bloodline, my ancestors were gentiles. But I've received the spirit of adoption whereby I cry, "Ab'ba Father." I'm adopted as a Jew by the Spirit. Thus, Abraham is the father of many nations.

Luke 22:20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.



John 1:12-13 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

John 6:54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

(In other words, whosoever believes on him, and reads the holy Scrpitures, and obeys them.)

Hebrews 9:11-22 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood. For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry. And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

It's sad, really. My selfishness, and my sins, killed a perfect holy and righteous man. So each time I sin, I partake in the crucifixion of Jesus, The Christ, Yet I also partake in his resurrection. I drink of his blood. I accept atonement. I didn't deserve it, but I accept it.

If you still don't understand.. I don't know what else to say, but READ THE BIBLE! :P



[This message has been edited by HellzShellz (edited 10-01-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by Atomical:

God died for all our sins. Therefore homosexuality will not get you disbarred from Heaven if you believe in Jesus. This fact alone pisses a lot of christians off because it doesn't give them a free pass to condemn those who are different.

Are you gay? Or can I generalize based on all the liberals on totse and come to the conclusion that all liberals are obsessed with homosexuals?

What with that idea that enlightenment cannot be put into words? Especially a language as limited as english. Spiritual matters and words of god seem a tad too advanced for english and the multitudes of translators. When we have crude words to express the idea's of god, and crude people to interpret and preach those words, I think we create a fine mess, which is what I see.

Thank you.

Jesus was the only way god could

get around god's rules. God loves

us and wants us all to go to heaven,

but god hates us and wants us to

burn in hell - that is why god sent

his son to sacrifice, to make god

happy, so god would let us into

heaven. Some people think this

was god's whole plan from the

beginning. That is why you should

love god, but fear god; god saved

you from a horrible fate at the

hands of god.

What don't you understand?

The diety/ies that I believe in are saner than bible god, I believe.

quote:Originally posted by Goat Saint:

If you acknowledge that Jesus died for your sins, and accept that belief into your heart along with Him as your savior. You are acknowledging a faith [in Him]. Consequently, you will be absolved and safe from damnnation.

So by your logic that means that if you believe in god then you could go murder, rape and steal and still be safe from damnation.

[This message has been edited by Fai1safe (edited 10-10-2005).]