Did Jesus really have to die for our sins?

[F0uad]

F0uad you have been busy haven't you? I am short on time so I will just blow all this away the easy way. Since Christianity strictly forbids all these activities even if true then their commission has no bearing on the religion. If I find time I will check into these things. If you want to evaluate a faith then look at it's adherents not it's defiers. How can someone who murders in spite of God telling them not to reflect on God in anyway.

So your saying that the Pope was not a Christian leader nor the Romans who canonized the bible in the same century and off-course made the Trinity the official concept while burning the other scriptures?

I am not trying to bash Christians or its history but you claimed something bold and i replied on it.

 

[javajo]

So your saying that the Pope was not a Christian leader nor the Romans who canonized the bible in the same century and off-course made the Trinity the official concept while burning the other scriptures?

I am not trying to bash Christians or its history but you claimed something bold and i replied on it.

Not directed at me, but here's my quick two cents. I believe the early church fathers of many churches in the region put the canon of scripture together and recognized the Deity of Christ and the Trinity to be taught in scripture through the leading of the Holy Spirit. It was not the Pope or the Catholic Church.

 

[F0uad]

Not directed at me, but here's my quick two cents. I believe the early church fathers of many churches in the region put the canon of scripture together and recognized the Deity of Christ and the Trinity to be taught in scripture through the leading of the Holy Spirit. It was not the Pope or the Catholic Church.

It was in the same century where they ordered the killings of other religions, forced people to convert to Christianity and burned other religious books included bibles that didn't fit there's. Go back a page and you will see what the argument was about.

 

[javajo]

It was in the same century where they ordered the killings of other religions, forced people to convert to Christianity and burned other religious books included bibles that didn't fit there's. Go back a page and you will see what the argument was about.

The Catholics sucked back then, I won't say what I think about them in the present. Wait...many muslims do that same stuff to people now...I won't say what I think about them, either.

 

[F0uad]

The Catholics sucked back then, I won't say what I think about them in the present. Wait...many muslims do that same stuff to people now...I won't say what I think about them, either.

Yet you trust that the trinity is right and the bible what they canonized? What about other bibles that have been burned or destroyed? What about the Christians who were forced to belief in the Christianity they taught there were groups that did not belief that Jesus(p) was god. Freedom of religion was forbidden yet allowed by Jesus(p) if you belief that so we can assume that the Romans in that time did change the religion to fit there benefits.

 

[javajo]

Yet you trust that the trinity is right and the bible what they canonized? What about other bibles that have been burned or destroyed? What about the Christians who were forced to belief in the Christianity they taught there were groups that did not belief that Jesus(p) was god. Freedom of religion was forbidden yet allowed by Jesus(p) if you belief that so we can assume that the Romans in that time did change the religion to fit there benefits.

I dunno, I just believe in Jesus who loved me and died for me. I don't know about jacked up people who abused 'religion' to control people. I have a wonderful relationship with Jesus now and he leads me and illuminates his Word to me through the Holy Spirit. He gives me great love, joy and peace deep in my heart and that is very real. He always helps me when I need it and has always been there for me in the most difficult of circumstances. I love him because he first loved me. Its more than just a belief, its more personal and very real.

 

[sojourner]

Yet you trust that the trinity is right and the bible what they canonized? What about other bibles that have been burned or destroyed? What about the Christians who were forced to belief in the Christianity they taught there were groups that did not belief that Jesus(p) was god. Freedom of religion was forbidden yet allowed by Jesus(p) if you belief that so we can assume that the Romans in that time did change the religion to fit there benefits.

Even flawed people can do good things. the Trinity makes a lot of theological sense, and the Bible does what it was designed to do: preserve the written tradition of the Church. What's your problem? That Christians aren't perfect? That the Bible isn't compiled to your satisfaction? Who died and made your opinion important to Xy?

 

[1robin]

So your saying that the Pope was not a Christian leader nor the Romans who canonized the bible in the same century and off-course made the Trinity the official concept while burning the other scriptures?

The Pope is no more able than me to speak for God. If he commands something forbidden by the bible (and they have relentlessly) and God, then what does that have to do with God or the religion. If my teacher continually teaches that 2 + 2 = 4 however if I am always skipping school and not paying attention in class, then I run out and declare 2 + 2 = 5. Is that any reflection on the teacher? Of course not. A religion should be judged by it's faithful followers. To judge it by it's rebelious defiers is meaningless. I am no fan of much of Catholosism. IMO many of them includeing many Popes were no more Christians than Joseph Stalin. IN fact they were worse at least Stalin admitted it.

I am not trying to bash Christians or its history but you claimed something bold and i replied on it.

F0uad are you familiar with the fact that many people who claim to be Christian are not according to Christ actually one. The bible says you must be born again. Many people are not but claim to be a Christian anyway. Regardless whether truely Christian or not if they act contrary to the bible then that is no reflection on the bible but instead a reflection on them.

 

[waitasec]

The Pope is no more able than me to speak for God. If he commands something forbidden by the bible (and they have relentlessly) and God, then what does that have to do with God or the religion. If my teacher continually teaches that 2 + 2 = 4 however if I am always skipping school and not paying attention in class, then I run out and declare 2 + 2 = 5. Is that any reflection on the teacher? Of course not. A religion should be judged by it's faithful followers. To judge it by it's rebelious defiers is meaningless. I am no fan of much of Catholosism. IMO many of them includeing many Popes were no more Christians than Joseph Stalin. IN fact they were worse at least Stalin admitted it.

by what criteria do you define "faithful"?

i don't get it. this is entirely subjective no matter how i look at it...

btw, i agree about what you said in regards to stalin and many of the popes....but i would go one step further and say ALL the popes...including the evil queen mother theresa.

 

[1robin]

by what criteria do you define "faithful"?

The people whos actions and claims match the bibles. I can't believe you don't know what that meant?

i don't get it. this is entirely subjective no matter how i look at it...

No it is objectively true or false. However concerning my personal claiming of who was or was not faithful, then some of my claims might be subjective others not. If a person said murder is good then my claiming he is not acting faithfully with the bible would be an objective fact.

btw, i agree about what you said in regards to stalin and many of the popes....but i would go one step further and say ALL the popes...including the evil queen mother theresa.

You are only the second human being I have ever heard say Mother theresa was evil. The other was Christopher Hitchens. Not good company. I don't agree all popes were bad but many were.

 

[waitasec]

The people whos actions and claims match the bibles. I can't believe you don't know what that meant?

the popes that you compared to stalin would be an example of a person who's actions and claims match the bible

No it is objectively true or false. However concerning my personal claiming of who was or was not faithful, then some of my claims might be subjective others not. If a person said murder is good then my claiming he is not acting faithfully with the bible would be an objective fact.

there is no way any one can determine what "faithful to the bible" means

 

[Thief]

there is no way any one can determine what "faithful to the bible" means

This is the best I've seen of you lately....and a true retort it is.

No two people read the scriptures in the same way.
But that much is expected in my perspective.
Each of us is undergoing a linear existence.
Each of us will end up as a unique spirit.

That was the intention, in the creation of this form....Man.

Now we can go back to topic and fit the teachings of the Carpenter
into all of this.

 

[1robin]

the popes that you compared to stalin would be an example of a person who's actions and claims match the bible

You can't possibly mean this. Nope, since the bible says do not murder and the popes cried out for the crusaders to kill people then that does not match the bible. When the pope appointed tetsal to sell salvation and the bible claims that it can only be found in faith in Christ then once again it doesn't match the bible. I find claims like yours here to be so obviously inaccurate I refuse to believe you actually meant it. It is this simple if the bible says not to do it and they say to do it then presto no match.

there is no way any one can determine what "faithful to the bible" means

Once again I am left in a bewilderment. I can't imagine anything easier. If the bible says do it and someone says don't then they are not faithful. I am stunned by your ability to trivialize the momentous and complicate the obvious. There has to be something going on with you that I don't get.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

The Bible says to stone disobedient daughters and kill whom God commands.

 

[Thief]

The Bible says to stone disobedient daughters and kill whom God commands.

I like cherry picking...I see you do too.

Hey!....how about those parables of the Carpenter!
Which one do you like?
Which ones don't you like?

 

[Heathen Hammer]

I like cherry picking...I see you do too.

Hey!....how about those parables of the Carpenter!
Which one do you like?
Which ones don't you like?

But Im not cherry picking. Im doing the opposite, Im including ALL that it says. The difference is important.

 

[Thief]

But Im not cherry picking. Im doing the opposite, Im including ALL that it says. The difference is important.

Whoa Dude!
If you would say to believe in all things written...no cherry picking?
THAT would be quite a bushel of cherries to carry around!

I quote scripture now and then, but no one can stand well if you insist about ALL of scripture, all at once.

I lean to the parables because they make sense to me.
The writings of Paul?...not so much....he rattles like a sermon.
so yeah..I cherry pick.

But then, how else to say who you follow?
If you quote someone other than your Lord....who then is your Lord?

 

[waitasec]

You can't possibly mean this. Nope, since the bible says do not murder and the popes cried out for the crusaders to kill people then that does not match the bible. When the pope appointed tetsal to sell salvation and the bible claims that it can only be found in faith in Christ then once again it doesn't match the bible. I find claims like yours here to be so obviously inaccurate I refuse to believe you actually meant it. It is this simple if the bible says not to do it and they say to do it then presto no match.

the bible says to commit genocide.
did you forget the midianites?

Once again I am left in a bewilderment.

i know. but don't worry, i don't expect you to understand.

 

[F0uad]

I have a question that has something to do with the title.


If Jesus(p) took away our sins then hes soul had to die (because the soul carries the burden) yet a soul cannot die according to the bible.. Please some clarification...

 

[Thief]

I have a question that has something to do with the title.


If Jesus(p) took away our sins then hes soul had to die (because the soul carries the burden) yet a soul cannot die according to the bible.. Please some clarification...

Scapegoating was a bodily response to a spiritual problem.
See the practice of Moses...old testament.
They really did believe sin to be something you got tangibly lay onto some other creature.
When that creature dies, with your sin upon it....the sin dies with it.

Christian belief piked up where that practice would have continued.
Lay your fault to the Carpenter and His death is your salvation.

I don't believe that.

He freed us from sin by His teachings.
He died for cause of a false accusation.