1. 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!

Featured Do all paths lead to God? No is the answer

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by Meandflower, May 1, 2021.

  1. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    Except that you’re assuming there’s a “punishment.”

    But the Bible says that God does NOT punish as we deserve. That’s grace.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    37,296
    Ratings:
    +13,253
    They're synonymous in my experience/observation. Christ's received the punishment and christians align themselves with that punishment because their sins are "crucified" on the cross. Once their sins are crucified, they receive the grace and faith (lack of better wording) to experience eternal life. In many protestant versions, eternal life is after life. From what I gather, eternal life for catholics (given you mentioned the Eucharist) is experienced at mass (of course solo though its highly emphasized as a group).

    It's more a christian believes in christ because christ took the penalty of that christian's sins onto him. So, when christ dies (whether seen as punishment or not) and resurrected they too have the faith and promise they would do the same.

    It's the wording not the differences in theology. If christ didn't die (or was punished to be sacrificed by the Romans) than there would be no substitution. There would need to be a death and resurrection. Whether one calls it punishment of christ or a gift or both is, in my opinion, irrelevant.
     
  3. Praise Jah

    Praise Jah Psalm 83:18

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2021
    Messages:
    77
    Ratings:
    +24
    Religion:
    Jehovah's Witness-Christian
    If you built a beautiful home and then let people live in it, but then those people chose to disrespect you, ignore your house rules, trash the house and ignore your repeated warnings to change their bad behavior, would you put up with it forever or would you eventually evict them and replace them with tenants who would respect you, your rules and your home?

    Jehovah God's will is that His name be sanctified and that peace on earth be restored where the righteous will enjoy everlasting life.

    Because God does love us he sent his Son as a ransom (John 3:16) and God is patient with us because he doesn't desire any to be destroyed. (2 Peter 3:9)

    Because God loves justice, his patience has a limit. Those who insist on maintaining their bad course of behavior will eventually reap what they sow...destruction. In perfect justice, Jehovah will act in behalf of his faithful servants and remove the wicked. (Proverbs 2:21-22) (2 Thessalonians 1:6-10)

    We are living in the last days (2 Timothy 3:1-5) and Jehovah's Day is near at hand. So, now is the time to act before it's too late. (Zephaniah 2:2-3) (Revelation 16:16)
     
  4. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    You forget that we aren’t “squatters,” “tenants,” or “guests.” This is our home, as God intends. We are God’s family.
    We have hope that all are found.
    That doesn’t fit into your explanation above, though. If God doesn’t desire that any are destroyed, then if God destroys one, God’s name cannot be sanctified, for we are all one.

    In perfect justice, God will justify humanity’s existence as a whole.

    This is proselytization.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    Except that you’re forgetting that there doesn’t have to be a substitution, there doesn’t have to be a sacrifice for sin, and there doesn’t have to be a punishment. You’re buying into systematic theology, and that isn’t always effective in doing what it’s designed to do. The theology of Substitutionary Atonement simply doesn’t fit the description of God as love, compassion, and forbearance, nor does it fit the description of God as omnipotent. You’d be better off applying more of a process theology approach.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Praise Jah

    Praise Jah Psalm 83:18

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2021
    Messages:
    77
    Ratings:
    +24
    Religion:
    Jehovah's Witness-Christian
    Jehovah God created the earth to be filled with and enjoyed by obedient, righteous inhabitants not disobedient, wicked inhabitants.

    God takes no pleasure in wickedness (Psalms 5:4) and he lovingly instructs and warns the wicked to turn back from their bad course before it's too late when he executes his perfect justice removing the wicked from the earth. (Ezekiel 33:11) (Psalms 104:35) (Deuteronomy 32:4)

    Jehovah God makes a distinction between those who are righteous and those who are wicked. Between those serving God and those not serving him. (Malachi 3:18)
     
  7. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    God knew who we are when God created us. We are the imago dei.
    Your examples are all from the Hebrew texts. The Incarnation changed all that.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    37,296
    Ratings:
    +13,253
    I thought you mentioned that it was a substitutionary approach and didn't involved sacrifice or punishment just substitution (so read) by jesus taking your debt to sin (or something or other).

    In simple terms it's like a mother dying to save her child. The compassion, love, and forbearance in her sacrifice so the child can live. She replaced her own life for the life of her child. Most mothers would do that for their children.

    I think that's the same idea when it comes to christ's life, death, and resurrection. Christians are the children, and the only way they understand and experience love and compassion is if their savior dies (like the mother) in order for christians to live.

    As for punishment, that's just referring to jesus' situation with the Romans and Jews. The idea is he died and took the place of christian debt to sin so they can live with their father forever. Whether it's called punishment or not is irrelevant.
     
  9. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    As I mentioned, that’s one way — but not the only, or best way — to see it. The idea is that he didn’t have to die in order to effect the expiation sin.
     
  10. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    36,665
    Ratings:
    +17,851
    Religion:
    ecumenical & naturalistic Catholic
    Why would you call the world "wicked"? Yes, there is too much wicked in the world, no doubt, but there's also a lot of love.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    37,296
    Ratings:
    +13,253
    My question is why wouldn't he?

    He would have had to change his ministry so the Jews wouldn't be offended and sent him to be crucified.
     
  12. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    It wasn’t an act of appeasement of an angry God. It was an act of love that saves us for God, not from hell.
     
    #152 sojourner, May 8, 2021
    Last edited: May 8, 2021
  13. CG Didymus

    CG Didymus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2012
    Messages:
    8,697
    Ratings:
    +3,505
    Religion:
    undecided
    How many people went to the tomb and what did they see and what happened? Each gospel is different. God dictated it different to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John? Or, could it be that these were the oral traditions that were being told?

    So God, who is supposedly all-knowing, created a spirit being he knew would turn against him? And take a third of the other spirit beings with him? So spirit beings have "free will"? They can decide for themselves to obey God or not? And some choose not to? How about the ones that didn't turn against God? Can we trust them? What if one of them decides to turn against God?

    But anyway, God knows that this one will turn against him, yet he created him anyway. He knows that someday he will destroy this evil spirit being, but in the meantime, God casts him down to Earth. Now who are people most likely to listen to? A voice in their heads that says, "live for yourselves", or a voice that says "obey all my rules"? But you say God didn't want to make "robots", yet he expects those that "love" him to become robots and obey his every word?

    And then, how literal are you going to take the Bible? There is a point where it gets a little extreme. Like do you believe the world and the universe is less than 10,000 years old? Or, that the world was completely flooded just a few thousands year ago? What I think is that all paths lead people to who and what they believe is true. Each one has a different idea of what is truth. Each, if they believe in God, has a different idea who that God is? Most teach that people should love one another. It'd be nice if they actually did that.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  14. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    37,296
    Ratings:
    +13,253
    I didn't mention god's anger, though. I just said that jesus gave himself up so that christians experience love, compassion, and such from what jesus and his god done for them.

    How does anger and hell relate to this?
     
  15. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    Because it’s part of that particular systematic theology. It is congruent with the older, Judaic model of sacrificing a life as a sin offering.
     
  16. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    37,296
    Ratings:
    +13,253
    I'm pretty simple, though. I never brought up theology or anything like that to speak of it.

    I was just saying that christians see sacrifice in itself as a means of love and compassion. In their case, they use jesus. But the point still remains: sacrifice is seen as something someone does for the better of that person-and that betterment is an act of love.

    You're saying something different and attaching it to hell and anger. None of my comments suggested that (right?)
     
  17. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    But any time you engage in this sort of postulation you’re doing theology. And you have stated the system called “Substitutionary Atonement.” Implied in that is that God is angry/jealous, if a sacrifice is required in order to remove sin.

    But yes, other constructs see the sacrifice as an act illustrating love. But in those constructs, the sacrifice is not necessary in order to expiate the sin.
     
  18. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    37,296
    Ratings:
    +13,253
    You haven't explained other ways, just told me there are alternative ways to see it.

    Also. Each of us online come from different backgrounds. It would be easier to stay with the context of what I'm saying than apply it to theology and jargon as such. I know for you, you translate as that, but the points are still the same I just don't intellectualize it.

    Keep it simple. Wisdom knows no intellect.
     
  19. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    37,290
    Ratings:
    +5,729
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    I did explain. Go back a couple of posts. You must just have missed seeing it or something.

    What you’re saying, though, is theology. It’s been worked out as a particular construct that systematizes what appears in the biblical record. But let’s just take the bit about sacrifice. We can either look at the sacrifice as the act that removes sin, or as an act that displays a level of prevailing love. We can look at it as either being a necessary component of sin-removal, or as a component that is unnecessary, but adds some level of meaning to the process of sin-removal. How you look at it determines the shape of your theological point of view.

    So, how do you look at it? Does the sacrifice rove the sin, or does it do something else? Do you think it’s necessary to the process, or not?
     
  20. Unveiled Artist

    Unveiled Artist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    37,296
    Ratings:
    +13,253
    I looked for other alternatives. You've only mentioned that you disagree that jesus sacrifice comes by compassion, what I said was Substitutionary Atonement, and no other alternatives to what you disagree with.

    This post context wasn't mentioned in your former posts. So, I have other questions (I know this is theology-I agree; but I'm not familiar with the jargon to speak of it as such).

    I never saw it as an either or scenario.

    "We can either look at the sacrifice as the act that removes sin, or as an act that displays a level of prevailing love."

    The act that removes sin is the act that prevails love. When you sacrifice yourself (say a mother) for her child its an act of sacrifice (her dying) and an act of love (giving her own life because she loves her child). I understand it as a combination not an either/or.

    I'm not christian so I don't have a theological viewpoint, just what I've learned and experience in the Church. Outside of conversation, I really don't think of it near at all to form a "personal" theological viewpoint.

    From how I learned it, if a christian doesn't believe in jesus, his or her sin puts that her at a distance between her and the creator. Sin is the wall between the christian and her creator. Since she can't get rid of sin on her own, and they can't be align with god like jesus, they need jesus to be a scapegoat (like an animal in the OT) to their sin so they are forgiven just as the Jews gave the animal to god so god would forgive them. Same concept, just in this case it's a human not an animal.

    As for hell, anger, and all of that, I know nothing about that. I wasn't raised in a christian household to where hellfire and any of that nonsense was taught.

    Do I think it necessary? Depends on the christian. I only speak from what I've experienced in the Church and learned reading the bible. I see no love in a stranger I have never met in person sacrificing himself for me. It's just not how I see reality.

    But in my understanding, disregarding hell and anger, it just means jesus is the scapegoat for christian's sins.

    But you haven't told me other ways to see it just told me that this is just one way to do so.
     
Loading...