• 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!

Why worship the biblical god?

Introvert

Member
You're trying to say a Christian has to be a biblical literalist to be considered a believer in the biblical God. The liberal Christian does not see it that way.

I'm not saying you have to be a literalist, but a lot of the things I mentioned are central concepts to the religion, eg; original sin, crucifixion, punishment for not believing/worshiping.

If you don't believe in those things, how can you be a Christian?
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
I'm not saying you have to be a literalist, but a lot of the things I mentioned are central concepts to the religion, eg; original sin, crucifixion, punishment for not believing/worshiping.

If you don't believe in those things, how can you be a Christian?

I think the progressive-minded Christians are making things like love, forgiveness, charity, brotherhood their central concepts with Christ as their example and leader/God.

Many of the archaic sounding old and new testament concepts are de-emphasized and not of much concern. These concepts are understood as part of the way the ancient Hebrews viewed their world.
 

Introvert

Member
I think the progressive-minded Christians are making things like love, forgiveness, charity, brotherhood their central concepts with Christ as their example and leader/God.


So your answer to "why worship the biblical god?" is "because they only believe the good parts" ? :p
 

Harrytic

Member
This would be a good point, except for the fact that Hell isn't a place. It's a state of being that no one's experiencing yet.
.

then how do you explain this verse?

Matthew 13:40-42: "Just as the weeds are separated out and burned, so it will be at the end of the world. I, the Son of Man, will send my angels, and they will remove from my Kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil, and they will throw them into the furnace and burn them. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
 

Shiranui117

Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
Premium Member
then how do you explain this verse?

Matthew 13:40-42: "Just as the weeds are separated out and burned, so it will be at the end of the world. I, the Son of Man, will send my angels, and they will remove from my Kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil, and they will throw them into the furnace and burn them. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
A part of the parable of wheat and tares. Next!
 

Shiranui117

Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
Premium Member
My understanding of Christianity is based on the words in the bible, not any particular denomination. I am also not American.
I apologize for assuming that you're American; it simply just so happens that most Christians I've met with the views you describe are American Protestants.

I'll go through your prior points and explain them:

''I said therefore to you, that you shall die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am, you shall die in your sins.'' John 8:24

“I am the way, the truth, and the life and no one comes to the Father except through me.” John 14:6

“That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” Romans 10:9

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 3:16
I don't believe that someone whose heart is open to Jesus, yet hesitates on becoming a Christian, is necessarily damned to Hell.

Without original sin, how is the death of Jesus necessary?
Your understanding of original sin seems to be the Augustinian/Reformed definition: That when Adam and Eve sinned, they put all of humanity in a legal debt to God, a debt that could never be satisfied, even if all of mankind was damned to Hell. This is not the ancient understanding of Christianity. It's a later innovation. The original teaching of "original sin," if it can even be called such, is that Adam's and Eve's sin corrupted the human nature, making it subject to sin, disease, suffering and death. We do not inherit the GUILT of Adam and Eve's sin, for as it says in Ezekiel 18:20, "The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son." Sin separates us from God, Who is the Source of Life. Therefore, separated from that Life, we suffer from death.

"Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come."
This is from Romans 5, yes? I'm familiar with the passage. I quote it often to combat the satisfaction theory of atonement.

12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned— 13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. 15 But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man’s offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many. 16 And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification. 17 For if by the one man’s offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.)
18 Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. 19 For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous.
20 Moreover the law entered that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace abounded much more, 21 so that as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

DEATH reigned over mankind. Humanity became slaves to sin after the Fall. It is not from God's wrath that we need to be saved (it is absurd that God would need to save us from Himself), but rather it is from sin and death that we need to be saved.

For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, 6 knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. 7 For he who has died has been freed from sin. 8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, 9 knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him. 10 For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. 11 Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Romans 6. Keep this passage in mind.

"many died by the trespass of the one man"
Because of the mortality introduced by the corruption of human nature.

"Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people."

How can you say the central part of the religion, Jesus dying for our sins, is not scriptural?
The question is not IF Jesus died for our sins, it is WHY.

If you say that Jesus died on the Cross to take the punishment for our sins and satisfy God's wrath and sense of justice, I entirely disagree. An innocent man dying for crimes he did not commit while the guilty go free is doubly unjust.

If you say that Jesus died to demonstrate His love for us, I would agree; after all, He said, "There is no greater love than this: To lay down one's life for a friend."

If you say that Jesus died to take on the burden of our sins, I would agree; He died, that sin might die with Him.

If you say that Jesus sacrificed Himself as a ransom for us from sin and death, I would wholeheartedly agree. Death cannot hold the Immortal; corruption cannot hold the Incorrupt. The end result of Jesus dying on the Cross in this scenario is that Jesus breaks apart the grip that sin and death have over mankind; we will still sin and we will still die, but we are not forever bound to them as before. We can now take God's hand and be resurrected from the dead to eternal life with Him.

If you say that Jesus died on the Cross to experience death, the weight of sin on our souls, and even separation from God, all that He might fully share in our human experience, that we may resurrect from the dead just as He did and begin to experience God's life, I wholeheartedly agree. With this understanding of Jesus' death, one realizes that He died to reconcile God and man, and He rose from the dead to open the door to Paradise. After agreeing to cooperate with God in our salvation, we begin to open ourselves up to Him, and allow Him to guide, sustain and assist us in our efforts to "become perfect as your Father in Heaven is perfect." This process of becoming more Godlike is known in Greek as "Theosis."
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
[FONT=&quot]Introvert said something that jogged my memories, all bad ones:[/FONT]
I would not back down and cower. I do not live in fear of ancient horror stories or invisible bullies, and I don't give in to something I disagree with out of fear, because I have this thing called a spine.
Up to eight years old or so, I lived in fear of my Dad and the God of the Catholic Church. If I didn't mow the lawn; I got in trouble. If I slugged my little sister for being an annoying brat; I got in trouble. My Dad ruled over me as a benevolent tyrant. I hated serving him and swore when I got bigger, I'd get even. My parents took me to the Catholic Church because that is what they grew up with. Did they live it? Did they believe it? You couldn't tell by their lives--except on Sundays. It was a mortal sin to miss Church. I missed Church constantly thanks to them, but I didn't mind. So I knew I was just as guilty. On top of that I stole some bubble gum a the store once and told a few lies. I was a hopeless sinner. Fear was the factor, not love. Being saved and going to heaven? To tell you the truth, heaven sounded boring. The fear of hell and God's wrath is what worried me. I used to put my feet up on the pew, because I thought a trapdoor would open up and I would slide straight down to hell.

Then I got older and bigger and smarter--Hell with my Dad and hell with the Church. Of course both my Dad and the Church had my best interests at heart, but they pushed me away because of their methods. Fear, "believe or else", "do it, because I said so", didn't work anymore. Naturally, I got into all the fun stuff--sex, drugs and rock and roll. It was great, but after twenty years of that, it got old and seemed empty. I needed love, true love, the love of a kinder, gentler God. Jesus fit the bill perfectly. He filled my heart. The walls I had built around me to insulate myself from the world started to come down. I felt good inside--all warm and fuzzy.

Then...people, Christian people, lied, stole, swore, had affairs, took drugs and did everything that Jesus didn't want them to do. They were hypocrites. So I figured why do I have to take the Bible so literal that I couldn't have a little fun myself. I got me a girlfriend and fornicated up a storm. And I learned something very important--most people that say they are Christians aren't very good Christians. So does anybody believe in God? Does anyone really fear him? A kinder-gentler God doesn't work, there's no immediate punishment for doing wrong. Damnation preaching evangelists know this. They try and put the fear of God back into us poor sinners (Elmer Gantry was my favorite). Guilt still works... for the young in mind. They know themselves well enough to realize that without a healthy fear of a wrathful God, they would go astray and get into all sorts of sinful behavior.

I'm trying to grow up now. I think Introvert and a few others are too. Liberal Christians are essentially saying that the "mean" God doesn't exist, that we are old enough and mature enough to know we should do good because it is the right thing to do. There seems to be a wonderful, mysterious spiritual force that surrounds us and can be in us if we let it. It's called love. Love doesn't hate. Love isn't jealous. Love is kind etc, etc. Are we mature enough to live in love and treat each other with respect? Does love conquer all? Can love really win? I doubt it, because arguing about God and which religion is better is so much fun. We still need the cosmic "good cop/bad cop" to keep us on our toes. And, because we all do a little sinning once in a while (Yes, even you goody, goody Christians), sometimes we need the bad one to scare the hell out of us and slap us around a bit. And sometimes. we need the sweet, loving one to hold us and tuck us in at night. Or, we could grow up spiritually? Naw.
 

Introvert

Member
Shiranui117, you claim that my understanding of the crucifixion and original sin is flawed, but then you pretty much agree with me on everything?

This is my understanding:

Adam and Eve sinned, and as a result, god punished all of humanity with suffering and death. (original sin)

God sent Jesus to die on the cross to atone for this, so that we can have eternal life again. (John 3:16)

Believing in this story of Jesus is necessary to get to heaven. (for unless you believe that I am, you shall die in your sins.'' John 8:24)


Correct me if I'm wrong, but you didn't really disagree with any of this in your last post, even though you earlier said it was a poor understanding?

So if my understanding is in fact correct..

God punished all of humanity for the sins of two people (unjust)
God sent his son to be brutally slaughtered (immoral)
God sent his son to die for our sins, allowing us to have eternal life again (unjust and immoral)
God rewards those who believe in a certain story and punishes those who don't (amoral)



So it appears God is immoral and unjust in the New Testament as well as the Old.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
God is in a no win situation. We read his book and he doesn't sound all that loving and kind. Yet, if we don't worship him, as a loving and kind God, we get in trouble. Or, maybe it's us in the no win situation. He punishes us for not following his rules, but he made the rules impossible to follow. Even if we're on a good streak of obeying, does everything turn out rosy? No, he "tests" us to see if we will continue trusting him. Who hasn't failed at that? So we curse him, quit trusting in him and finally quit believing in him. So then we're in trouble for not believing in him. The system is set up to fear him and his wrath for not loving him with all our heart and all our mind? Like that is even possible.
 
It puzzles me as well.

Most people I know wouldn't use a two thousand year-old map to navigate their way around the Middle-East and Europe.

So why do so many think such a map can lead them to heaven/god/understanding?
 

ChristineES

Tiggerism
Premium Member
It puzzles me as well.

Most people I know wouldn't use a two thousand year-old map to navigate their way around the Middle-East and Europe.

So why do so many think such a map can lead them to heaven/god/understanding?

I suppose in order to understand why someone follows something, you have to be experiencing it. :)
Welcome to the RF.
 

Shiranui117

Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
Premium Member
Shiranui117, you claim that my understanding of the crucifixion and original sin is flawed, but then you pretty much agree with me on everything?

This is my understanding:

Adam and Eve sinned, and as a result, god punished all of humanity with suffering and death. (original sin)

God sent Jesus to die on the cross to atone for this, so that we can have eternal life again. (John 3:16)

Believing in this story of Jesus is necessary to get to heaven. (for unless you believe that I am, you shall die in your sins.'' John 8:24)


Correct me if I'm wrong, but you didn't really disagree with any of this in your last post, even though you earlier said it was a poor understanding?

So if my understanding is in fact correct..

1: God punished all of humanity for the sins of two people (unjust)
2: God sent his son to be brutally slaughtered (immoral)
3: God sent his son to die for our sins, allowing us to have eternal life again (unjust and immoral)
4: God rewards those who believe in a certain story and punishes those who don't (amoral)



So it appears God is immoral and unjust in the New Testament as well as the Old.
No. You are making your original point as well as my own argument vague and unspecific to the point where they seem to be in agreement with each other, and then you're viewing it through a very dark and cynical lens.

The points of yours that I originally disagreed with and refuted are not present in the above post. In addition, your points 2 and 3 that I numbered are essentially restatements of each other. And as regards #4, I never agreed with that.

I understand if you choose not to agree with the points I've made. But I'd appreciate it if you didn't try to twist my words to fit your own prejudices.
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
It puzzles me as well.

Most people I know wouldn't use a two thousand year-old map to navigate their way around the Middle-East and Europe.

So why do so many think such a map can lead them to heaven/god/understanding?

Very good point.

What map should they be looking at?
 

Harrytic

Member
Originally Posted by Shiranui117
This would be a good point, except for the fact that Hell isn't a place. It's a state of being that no one's experiencing yet.

Originally Posted by Harrytic
then how do you explain this verse?

Matthew 13:40-42: "Just as the weeds are separated out and burned, so it will be at the end of the world. I, the Son of Man, will send my angels, and they will remove from my Kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil, and they will throw them into the furnace and burn them. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."


A part of the parable of wheat and tares. Next!

Whoa! Not so fast. Take a closer look. From verses 36 - 42 Jesus is giving a literal interpretation of the parable.


36 Then he left the crowd and went into the house. His disciples came to him and said, “Explain to us the parable of the weeds in the field.”
37 He answered, “The one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man. 38 The field is the world, and the good seed stands for the people of the kingdom. The weeds are the people of the evil one, 39 and the enemy who sows them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the harvesters are angels.
40 “As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. 42 They will throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Whoever has ears, let them hear.

Verse 40 is clearly giving a literal interpretation of the Parable of the tares which proves that according to Jesus, Hell is a place and not just a state of being .

NEXT!
 
Last edited:
Top