Please explain something about Christianity

[GoodyGoodyGumdrops]

Before I start, I just want to be quite clear that I'm not trying to be contentious or antagonistic. I'm a person of a different faith, who accepts the plurality of faiths, and wants to live in peace and understanding with others.

My question is about Jesus's death atoning for your sins. Does he not atone for all sins past and future, so that others can believe in him and also receive this atonement? In which case, why do you need to behave ethically?

I think you only have to listen to the evening news to know for sure that sin has entered our world.

That's just humans not being perfect. And the fossil record shows we're getting better/less violent.

We only need to look at ourselves to see we're also wrong-doers sometimes

I know I make mistakes. And they're my responsibility. No one else can take the rap.

That their religion is the real deal. And that your faith is false

An awful lot of them, whilst recognising there are differences, see it more as a preference list rather than necessity. A Buddhist can be Buddhist and anything else they fancy, same with Hinduism.

God says he is a righteously jealous God and he's not happy with us dabbling into other false religions. Partly for our own good and partly because they represent Satan trying to assert himself to God's status.

Sorry to hark on but even secular scholars accept the bible is very old and would therefore have people with old names. I cannot see how this in anyway relates to believing in a God. I couldn't imagine anyone saying 'I'm a Christian because this book that was written in 2000 bc has people with names they actually used in 2000 bc.

Am I missing something?
No, sorry, I think I'm. It being clear about it. Let me start again and explain it better. I was in a hurry yesterday and was aware I didn't give it my all. I will come back later to reword it so it makes more sense. I can't now as am off out for a bit, so please hang on, I will return.

t adds to the supporting evidence that the bible isn't fabricated

But no one is claiming the bible was written in 1987 in Grimsby. What we're disputing is that Jesus was God and rose from the dead.

God says he is a righteously jealous God and he's not happy with us dabbling into other false religions

Well he needs to man up then. And God realises the other gods are false doesn't he? And that they love something that isn't actually real. So should feel sorry for us. Getting jealous is just ridiculous.

The fact this isn't a regular occurrence (resuscitation doesn't count) shows that it was divine intervention

No it means it's made up.

The same divide inspiration that we celebrate at Christmas. The God of the impossible, such as miracles, virgin birth, resurrection, free gift of undeserved grace.

The God of the impossible, such as miracles, virgin birth, resurrection, free gift of undeserved grace.

Which we have no evidence for.

I had an interesting debate with a Christian friend of mine. I asked that if I brutally murdered the whole of an Atheist family in the most horrific way and then excepted Jesus as my saviour would I go to heaven? He said yes without a second thought. So then I asked about the souls of the atheist family as they did not believe in god and did not except Jesus into their life would they go to Hell? After much deliberation (guess he was searching for a get clause) and being reluctant to answer he said yes they would all unfortunately all go to Hell as they had not excepted Jesus.

Gods justice is a funny sort of justice I thought.

"the bible is accurate historically, archaeologically"
If so, why does it say that Herod the Great was King of Judea while Quirinius was Governor of the same area?

CasualCobra never let a good story get in the way of the truth

And his hesitation reveals that he has more morals than his god.

headinhands give the guy a break; 7 days aint long to build the universe. I think its fair to say he may have rushed the job a bit. How else do you explain piers morgan?

death
[deth]
noun
1.
the act of dying; the end of life; the total and permanent cessation of all the vital functions of an organism.
Compare brain death.

Hence Jesus at most had a temporary death, I assume you would agree it wasn't a permanent death, but I would contend it was like a coma. We certainly have evidence of people being certified dead and then 'coming back to life', but we now know they were never really dead. Which would be most likely what happened to Jesus if he ever existed in the Biblical sense.

Would it be miraculous that a demi god/son of god/or even a god came back to life? Not really, its quite common for gods to be immortal in mythology certainly not miraculous.

If we are forgiven for all sins, they is it not morally ok to commit crime as long as you seek god, and someone else can pay for it?

Despite Jesus dying for your sins your out the woods yet. Read the small print. You still have to accept god in you heart. I believe this was the deal before Jesus came to visit. So in reality Jesus coming was a little pointless apart for a publicity stunt. To be fair with the amount of Gods knocking about in that time/location I can see the need for such a publicity stunt.

Interesting thread, I've been thinking heaps about organised religion recently, due to suddenly working with a few Jehovahs Witnesses (who are lovely and don't discuss their views at work by the way). I'm an atheist, and while I can't completely rule out some sort of conscious force which may have created the big bang, the more I think about it, the more I know that all earthly religions are incorrect. Here is my reasoning:

• There is not one solid theory on God, and the fact that whatever the truth is the majority of the world would be incorrect in their beliefs. I feel that if there is a God, either this would not have happened, and there would be one universal faith, or he/she/it would not have a problem with other faiths, therefore eliminating any need for specific religions. I.E would a fair god who loves everybody (referring to the Christian god) honestly take offence at an Amazonian tribe worshipping their own gods, having never had any exposure to the Bible?
• I personally do not believe that the 'soul' exists, but that our personalities are a product of our brains, and evolution. I cannot see how people could believe in souls, which can then live on after death, and also believe that we evolved from single celled organisms. At what point did we become capable of being 'good' or 'evil' or sinning?
• Why do none of the holy texts mention evolution, or other planets? This to me a big deal - I might be less sceptical if the bible had talked about the creation of galaxies not yet discovered, but it doesn't. I am sure alien life will be discovered soon (just microbes or mould or something), how will religions react to this?
• Regarding Christianity, the whole premise of God having a human son with a married woman (maybe I have this wrong?) who had not yet consummated her marriage, let him grow up, have him suffer lots of pain then die, just to absolve humanities sins past and present - what os the point of this? Surely God must have orchestrated the whole thing, therefore why not just forgive the sins without the suffering? It makes zero sense to me.
• he pure hypocrisy of the Bible. The old Testament is full of god ordering people to rape women and kill men (I can find quotes - not exaggerating). It says nothing against slavery, and says it's 'an abomination' for men to sleep with each other. Based on my own morals, this is completely wrong, and therefore the bible is not moral and clearly written reflecting some terrible parts of human nature thousands of years ago.

Sorry I've rambled on - these are things which have been flying around my head a lot at the minute and it's nice to write them down, hope no offence was caused.

Very biased site, but interesting quotes here: www.evilbible.com

1DAD can I ask you, I presume you are atheist from your posts, as an atheist, would you want to go to heaven after death, to be 'at one' with a God, who you don't believe in, who you emphatically and fundamentally don't agree with? Wouldn't that, in fact, be a kind of hell?

Why do none of the holy texts mention evolution

ACubed the Bible does mention 'inheritance', in a way that is interesting when Epigenetics are being considered. It is not surprising the Bible does not mention evolution specifically ( in scientific terms), since Darwin's theories had been not published at the time - he coined the term. The Bible mainly employs narrative techniques to communicate ideas, the focus is different to science - you cannot readily compare the two.

Yes but it does not explain how we evolved, instead claiming that the first two humans came ready-made. This is clearly not the case, so why say it? Some say Bible stories are metaphors, but I don't feel you can just take out all the really unlikely parts and describe them in that way.
Science is aimed at discovering the truth about nature, surely religion should have the same goal?

ACubed Not really biased in terms of fact/evidence. Only biased in the way that most posters are critical of Christian faith. Alough this is probably to be expected in a modern secular society.

Rockpebblestone I am mainly trying to stay in context to the idea of jesus dying for our sins and the nature of how people are chosen to go to heaven.

Would I want to go to heaven in a hypothetical world, we that depends on what heaven is. Not sold on the idea to be fair. Tell me what would this heaven involve because from what I can see it doesn't invole much more than everyone being dosed up on magic happy pills devoid of any conflict or intrest? On the other hand hell sounds like hell so given the option yes heaven sounds better.

I could write for ever on what I don't agree with. If we are talking the god of the bible he is a hard man to love. He's jealous, egocentric, genocidal and a master of double standards. If he was to come down to earth today he shouldn't be too surprised if he ended up in front of the International Court of Justice in the Hague. I could go about my moral objections to him (assuming he is a man) but lets not forget the scientific and rational case for refuting his entire existence in the first place.

Sadly bully boy threats of hell do little to persuade me or make me like the god of the Christian faith.

would you want to go to heaven after death, to be 'at one' with a God, who you don't believe in, who you emphatically and fundamentally don't agree with? Wouldn't that, in fact, be a kind of hell?

I wouldn't want to spend eternity with the God of the bible. He's a monster. The only sort of God i'd like to knock about with would be beyond my wildest dreams in terms of kindness. There's no evidence of such a God existing.

I'm morally superior to Yahweh so he just wouldn't do it for me.

ACubed, Christianity comes from a different perspective to science, it is concerned with knowing God, rather than discovering 'truth about nature'. It states all things come through and by Him, so, contextually, attempting to discover truth about anything, whilst ignoring God, according to Christian belief, is essentially ignoring a bigger picture, the whole truth.

The Creation account is not stated as scientific theory and cannot be treated as such. There are many ways of interpreting meaning from it. If you intend to find meaning in something, I would actually suggest you firstly need to consider it, as it stands, alone before you try to relate it to anything else.

If god exists he would come under 'Nature' which is what science is concerned with - the theory of everything. So are you saying the creation account in the bible is not true? What is the purpose of it being in the bible if it's not true?
How can you then say that the parts about Jesus are true, but that the creation story is not true? I don't understand at all. Surely either it is all true or none of it? Or are you saying some aspects are true and some are not, in which case who are you supposed to tell?