Frank Goad
Well-Known Member
If God is all powerful why did jesus have to die for us?Why did God not make another way to save us?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Something that's always bothered me about the bible
- Thread starter Frank Goad
- Start date
lukethethird
unknown member
He's one nasty dude.
I think the Atonement Doctrine was included by men with a certain theological position making becoming a believer a necessity for salvation.
I think that was a bad inclusion and not something Jesus supports.
Don’t let it bother you. I believe Jesus was a genuine spiritual master and teacher but the Bible has human hands in it. I’m fine with that understanding.
TheresOnlyNow
The Mind Is Everything. U R What U Think
Why did God plant that tree in Eden? Knowing his orders not to eat of it would be disobeyed. When God is forgiveness, why didn't he forgive Adam and Eve for being manipulated by the Satan God allowed to slither up the tree knowing full well what its fruit contained?
Maybe the whole point from Genesis to Revelation in matters of faith is this. The first step into faith is accepting we need to be saved from the wrath of the God that set the whole paradigm to working.
74x12
Well-Known Member
I answered this question in a thread a made awhile.
Here is what I said:
Why would God need Jesus' blood just to forgive us? It is to satisfy His fiery nature. On one hand God desires to forgive; but must satisfy the consuming Fire which demands justice. So what to do? God is trapped because He has to destroy us against His own will! --His will is to show us mercy-- But love has a way. God came in the likeness of a human being to die for our sins. So we may be forgiven. Jesus blood is proof of the true love of God.
But I think it makes more sense in context; check out the full post.
Jollybear
Hey
If God made "another way" to be saved, as in like, just forgive us without punishment, or sacrifice, then hed basically be like a parrent that never shows his children discipline.
A child saying sorry all the time and being forgiven all the time wont ever learn to do whats right.
TheresOnlyNow
The Mind Is Everything. U R What U Think
That link isn't working for me.
Jollybear
Hey
Theres bible verses where jesus is the one talking refering to his sacrifice though. What about those?
74x12
Well-Known Member
Thanks. I think I fixed it. Try it now.
TheresOnlyNow
The Mind Is Everything. U R What U Think
Yes, it is fixed.
Thank you.
There are debates about what Jesus is likely to have historically said and what he is unlikely to have historically said. I believe the Atonement Doctrine did not come from Jesus but was a human creation.
Jollybear
Hey
Yes, debates. But, i guess what im getting at is, why do you think he didnt say those parts about his sacrifice? Or, why did the authors fabricate those parts by making him say that?
There have been millions of words said about that and theological haggling by those putting the Bible into place. I don't have a strong theory to explain all that.
My thought is that this doctrine is not important to us today and was part of the past theological haggling. If you can find a possible meaning for us today, I would like to hear it. A simpler theology based on love and oneness is really all that is pertinent to us today.
Atonement for me takes its original meaning as at-one-ment
Salvador
RF's Swedenborgian
As I've mentioned in other discussions about Christianity, this religion is demonstrated as being false.
The Biblical account of creation, regarding the origin of homo sapiens is false; because as I've noted elsewhere in some other discussions about Christianity, Jesus's family tree has a time span of 77 generations listed between his generation and Adam whom the Bible claims was the "first man". Reference: (Luke 3:23-38) and Eve whom the Bible claims as the mother of all the living. (Genesis 3:20)
However, the Australian aborigines have evidently been in Australia for over a thousand consecutive generations. Reference: Aboriginal Australians - Wikipedia
There have been hundreds of generations of Native Americans between the time their common ancestry migrated from Asia until the time of Christ.
Reference: Native Americans in the United States - Wikipedia
Of course, the Bible is wrong; in fact, there were people prior to the 76th generation before Christ that allegedly was spawned by Adam and Eve.
Adam as being the first man and perpetrator of original sin is an important premise of Christianity. If Adam wasn't the first man, then there isn't actually any "origin sin". Jesus supposedly died on the Cross to save humankind from "original sin". If there isn't any "original sin" from which to be saved, then Jesus Christ's death on the Cross is pretty pointless and meaningless. Evidently, there were many generations of people prior to the 76th generation before Christ whom the Bible claims was spawned by Adam. So then, Adam, Eve and original sin are mythological. There is neither any "first man" nor "original sin" throughout human evolution. Thus, Jesus Christ having died on the cross to save mankind from "original sin" is not reality but is rather mythological.
Based on genetic diversity, there's never been a human population bottleneck as low as one primordial couple.
Human genetic diversity is too great for there to have ever been a human population size that consisted of less than 10,000 individuals. Pairwise Sequentially Markovian Coalescent (PSMC) analysis confirms a population bottleneck in humans that consisted of no fewer than 10,000 individuals. Source: ( Li, Heng, and Durbin, Richard. ) "Inference of Human Population History from Individual Whole-Genome Sequences". Nature International Weekly Journal of Science. 28 July 2001. PSMC estimate on simulated data. : Inference of human population history from individual whole-genome sequences : Nature : Nature Publishing Group
If there were the most severe population bottle-necking such as one breeding pair that is portrayed in the case of the Biblical Adam and Eve, then there would be a maximum of 4 alleles passed on by Adam and Eve to their children. Furthermore, the subsequent inbreeding would cause some loss of alleles due to genetic drifting. There would not have been genetic diversity in the small group of Adam, Eve and their children who would've had to commit incest among each other for the procreation of their inbred children. A lack of genetic diversity would have persisted for thousands of generations until genetic mutations could cause the genetic diversity of today's population. Based on the number of different alleles there are for the number of genes within the current population and the known rate of mutations per nucleotide sites in humans, geneticists can calculate the minimum number of people needed to create the current amount of genetic diversity. Numerous genetic studies suggest that there were several thousands of people more than two people during the most severe population bottleneck which ever occurred in human history.
DNA segments ( Alu repeats ) insert themselves at various chromosomal locations. There are various forms of Alu sequences and several thousand families of Alu. One well-studied family of Alu is called Ya5, which has been inserted into human chromosomes at 57 mapped locations. If we were to have descended from a single pair of ancestors such as Adam and Eve, then we all would have each of the 57 elements inserted at the same location points of our chromosomes. " However, the human population consists of groups of people who share some insertion points but not others. The multiple shared categories make it clear that although a human population bottleneck occurred, it was definitely never as small as two. In fact, this line of evidence also indicates that there were at least several thousand people when the population was at its smallest". Source: ( Venema, Dennis and Falk, Darrel ) " Does Genetics Point to a Single Primal Couple?". 5 April 2010. Does Genetics Point to a Single Primal Couple? | The BioLogos Forum
Coalescence theory analysis of single nucleotide polymorphisms and linkage disequilibrium indicates the mean effective population size for hominid lineage is 100,000 individuals over the course of the last 30 million years. The effective population size estimated from linkage disequilibrium is a minimum of 10,000 followed by an expansion in the last 20,000 years." Source: ( Tenesa, Albert, Navarro, Paul, Hayes, Ben J., Duffy, David L., Clarke,Geraldine, Goodard, Mike E. and Visscher, Peter M.) " Recent Human Effective Population Size Estimated from Linkage Disequilibrium". Genome Research. 17 April 2007 Recent human effective population size estimated from linkage disequilibrium
Salvador
RF's Swedenborgian
The first individual of the genus Homo-species very likely formed from a couple of Australopithecus hetero zygotes, each of whom had the same type of chromosome rearrangements formed by fusion of the whole long arms of two acrocentric chromosomes, mated together and reproduced viable and fertile offspring with 46 chromosomes.
This first generation of Homo habilis then likely incestuously bred with each other and reproduced the next subsequent generation of Homo habilis.
References:
1. J. Tjio and A. Levan. 1956. The chromosome number of Man. Hereditas, 42( 1-2): 1-6.
2. W. Ijdo et al.1991. Origin of human chromosome 2: an ancestral telomere-telomere fusión. PNAS, 88: 9051-9056.
3. Meyer et al. 2012 A high-coverage genome sequence from an archaic Denisovan individual. Science, 338:222-226.; K. H. Miga. 2016. Chromosome-specific Centromere sequences provide an estímate of the Ancestral Chromosome 2 Fusion event in Hominin Genome.Journ. of Heredity. 1-8. Doi:10.1093/jhered/esw039.
This first generation of Homo habilis then likely incestuously bred with each other and reproduced the next subsequent generation of Homo habilis.
References:
1. J. Tjio and A. Levan. 1956. The chromosome number of Man. Hereditas, 42( 1-2): 1-6.
2. W. Ijdo et al.1991. Origin of human chromosome 2: an ancestral telomere-telomere fusión. PNAS, 88: 9051-9056.
3. Meyer et al. 2012 A high-coverage genome sequence from an archaic Denisovan individual. Science, 338:222-226.; K. H. Miga. 2016. Chromosome-specific Centromere sequences provide an estímate of the Ancestral Chromosome 2 Fusion event in Hominin Genome.Journ. of Heredity. 1-8. Doi:10.1093/jhered/esw039.
Ellen Brown
Well-Known Member
Not to stamp on too many sacred beliefs, but in Christianity perhaps Jesus did not die for us but simply demonstrated to us that there is a path from the heavens to this life and back to the Heavens again.
Best guess: That statement is connected with belief in hellfire, generally based on a literal concept of the afterlife in place of the concept of spiritual revival. It is devoid of morality and unrelated to the concept of God.
Better yet, what is death for?
nPeace
Veteran Member
God abides by his own standards... which include justice and righteousness.
Try this article, and see if it makes sense.
This is also a good one.
Last edited:
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
I see that article is based upon a myth which requires one to believe that God lies. How does that help your cause?
A REAL CHRISTIAN
Member
Justice is the giving of something to make up for a crime. I burn your house down its only right you sue me for the sum to make it right. In Gods scheme of things BLOOD is the only thing worth anything not gold not land, BLOOD (Lev 17 something). Blood of animals is not good enough ( notice in the OT jews are constantly sacrificing animals) blood of men is no good because they sin and are therefore "tainted". So poor people poor us what do we have to make up for our transgressions? NOTHING! What is needed is a man with freewill who has NEVER sinned to sacrifice his blood for us. There was none so God himself came down as Jesus A real man who could have sinned but didnt and shed his blood for us. But that was 2000 years ago how do we now TOUCH jesus blood? This is why baptism is when you are saved ( Acts 2: 38) because also in gods scheme of things being baptised UNDER WATER is the same thing as dying with christ. Read romans chap 6. And Hebrews chap 8- 11( its tricky though)