"Jesus Died For Your Sins". Please explain.

[raindog]

@Lobohan

@raindog

How about you and I discuss this from the texts from the position of Catholicism? I mean, I was raised a Catholic and know quite a bit about Catholicism.

Are you prepared to have that discussion?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

Why Catholics? Most non-Catholic Christians also believe in Jesus’ divinity.

Also, this isn’t Law and Order, I don’t think you can compel me to answer nuanced questions in simple yes or no terms.

In any case, I’m not arguing for or against the divinity of Christ. I don’t believe that God exists, so Christ’s divinity is a foregone conclusion. I’m just saying that your opinion of his divinity is so utterly unaccepted that it isn’t worth inclusion in a general question about Christianity.

As I say, someone somewhere believes Jesus was a space alien. You want to include his fringe view in every discussion about Christianity too?

I’ve never received a simple “yes”, or “no” to that question, although I’ve done everything but beg for a simple, concise one word answer.

Of course, I have a strong suspicion that there are real, unstated reasons as to why a simple “yes” or “no” is so hard to render.

But a simple “no” would have sufficed. :rolleyes:

[Lobohan]

@raindog

@Lobohan

Why Catholics? Most non-Catholic Christians also believe in Jesus’ divinity.

Also, this isn’t Law and Order, I don’t think you can compel me to answer nuanced questions in simple yes or no terms.

In any case, I’m not arguing for or against the divinity of Christ. I don’t believe that God exists, so Christ’s divinity is a foregone conclusion. I’m just saying that your opinion of his divinity is so utterly unaccepted that it isn’t worth inclusion in a general question about Christianity.

As I say, someone somewhere believes Jesus was a space alien. You want to include his fringe view in every discussion about Christianity too?

I’ve never received a simple “yes”, or “no” to that question, although I’ve done everything but beg for a simple, concise one word answer.

Of course, I have a strong suspicion that there are real, unstated reasons as to why a simple “yes” or “no” is so hard to render.

But a simple “no” would have sufficed. :rolleyes:

As I say, I wanted to illustrate how utterly inept the question was.

[raindog]

@Lobohan

@raindog

I’ve never received a simple “yes”, or “no” to that question, although I’ve done everything but beg for a simple, concise one word answer.

Of course, I have a strong suspicion that there are real, unstated reasons as to why a simple “yes” or “no” is so hard to render.

But a simple “no” would have sufficed. :rolleyes:

As I say, I wanted to illustrate how utterly inept the question was.

Yea, I read that. :dubious:

[smiling_bandit]

@DanBlather

Really? You don’t think it’s convoluted? First, God being prescient, knew that Eve would eat the apple which he created, form the tree he created, from the snake he created, because of her weakness that he created. But he acts all surprised about it and gets so pissed off that he punishes their children!! For eternity!! Think about that, what fucked up sort of being does that. It’s just about the most evil thing you could do to someone. You set out laws forbidding them from having sex without procreating and then you let them know that any kids they create will suffer eternal damnation. It’s sick and twisted.

I have a very relevant quesiton for you. If you knew. And I mean, knew, that one of your own children was going very bad, would you take the bastard out back and wring his neck?

I very much doubt it. And a being of pure love can creation can no more do than than I would kill my children (granted, I don’t have any, but still). We are Adam and Eve: we are jsut the same as they. We are the ones who would eat the apple. We are the kind of people who would jump off a bridge because everyone else was doing it, or just to be contrary. The problem is us, our choices. That said, it’s not as if the situastion is hopeless: Jesus’s entire purpose in dying was to both state that and make hope real.

But then, you are apparently schizophrenic and one of your personalities rapes a woman and gets her pregnant so that she can bear another one of your personalities. Then you get tired of him and kill him off in a gruesome manner (though no more gruesome than millions of other people through the ages, including two that very day). But now you decide to be all merciful and let people that believe one of you schizophrenic identities was really you, to not suffer eternal damnation. Oh, and they can be the worst, most evil people in the world, but if they sincerely accept the story they will be saved.

Yeah… let’s just say that willfully making shit up to make things sound bad is not exactly a good argument.

Now it get’s interesting. Depending on your interpretation if you live someplace without hearing about all this you will suffer eternal damnation, or you may be safe until you send one of your followers to convert them, at which time having been offered knowledge, and this time refusing it, they will suffer eternal damnation.

An “interpretation” which was was never abandoned by mainstream Chistiranity because it was never a part of mainstream Chirstianity. Oh granted, it was a common peasant folk belief, but I can think of no major Christian figure (outside of a few cranks who attracted a lot of attention, but little influence) who actually held this.

[Snarky_Kong]

@raindog

I’ve never received a simple “yes”, or “no” to that question, although I’ve done everything but beg for a simple, concise one word answer.

Of course, I have a strong suspicion that there are real, unstated reasons as to why a simple “yes” or “no” is so hard to render.

But a simple “no” would have sufficed. :rolleyes:

Have you stopped beating your girlfriend? A simple yes or no will suffice.

[DanBlather]

@smiling_bandit

I have a very relevant quesiton for you. If you knew. And I mean, knew, that one of your own children was going very bad, would you take the bastard out back and wring his neck?

I very much doubt it. And a being of pure love can creation can no more do than than I would kill my children (granted, I don’t have any, but still). We are Adam and Eve: we are jsut the same as they. We are the ones who would eat the apple. We are the kind of people who would jump off a bridge because everyone else was doing it, or just to be contrary. The problem is us, our choices. That said, it’s not as if the situastion is hopeless: Jesus’s entire purpose in dying was to both state that and make hope real.

Isn’t that a case of the “excluded middle”? You either kill them or damn them to hell for all eternity? How about educating them, or explaining why eating the apple is not good, or putting a fence around it, or making the snake mute? As a parent I put locks on cabinet doors and those plastic thingies in the outlets. I didn’t hand my kid a knife, say “don’t cut yourself” and then expect good things to happen. The whole idea that man is born “evil” is repellent. The idea that on would let the acts of two people many, many generations ago taint new born children is sociopathic.

Yeah… let’s just say that willfully making shit up to make things sound bad is not exactly a good argument.

What part of that was not in scripture?

An “interpretation” which was was never abandoned by mainstream Chistiranity because it was never a part of mainstream Chirstianity. Oh granted, it was a common peasant folk belief, but I can think of no major Christian figure (outside of a few cranks who attracted a lot of attention, but little influence) who actually held this.

Someone should tell the Vatican:

The Church is conscious that this salvation is attainable only in Christ through the Spirit. But the Church, as mother and teacher, cannot fail to reflect upon the fate of all men, created in the image of God, and in a more particular way on the fate of the weakest members of the human family and those who are not yet able to use their reason and freedom… Rather, the Catechism teaches that infants who die without baptism are entrusted by the Church to the mercy of God, as is shown in the specific funeral rite for such children. The principle that God desires the salvation of all people gives rise to the hope that there is a path to salvation for infants who die without baptism

So official doctrine is that baptism is necessary for salvation, but there is *hope *that God *may *forgive pagan babies.

[The_Flying_Dutchman]

@Girl_Next_Door

[munches forbidden apple]

Don’t worry. We really don’t know exactly what forbidden fruit Adam ate.

[marshmallow]

There are lots of nitpicking you could do over this story. Like, why did God decide that was the time to sacrifice Jesus and wipe out sin? Why would he decide that at all? Did he realize he made a mistake condemning all humans after the Garden of Eden?

But forget that. What about the cosmological history of God’s plan? Lay out the events of the Bible. Jesus does his thing. Add 2000+ years. Jesus is supposed to come back at some point and will judge the living and the dead and all that jazz. Cool. So…what was the point of that 10,000 year block of time? Are we ants and God is the big kid with the galactic magnifying glass? Why the celestial conspiracy theory?

[FriarTed]

@DanBlather

What part of that was not in scripture?

I think the raping of Mary by one of the Trinity is a rather radical reinterpretation of the text.

[FriarTed]

raindog- I think a lot of people here really don’t know what you believe about the spiritual status of Jesus & his relationship to God. Now, I do know and realize that while you do not hold him to be God along with the Father, you also hold that he is more than just another creation. So could you explain for the rest your view of the status of Jesus & why his life is sufficient to redeem all of humanity?

Btw, I’m thinking of opening up a discussion- “Does the New Testament teach that Jesus is God & if not, what does the NT teach Jesus is?” thread.

[DanBlather]

@FriarTed

@DanBlather

What part of that was not in scripture?

I think the raping of Mary by one of the Trinity is a rather radical reinterpretation of the text.

Can you point me to the passage where she consents to being impregnated? I searched my copy of the NT and can’t find it.

[John_Mace]

@DanBlather

@FriarTed

I think the raping of Mary by one of the Trinity is a rather radical reinterpretation of the text.

Can you point me to the passage where she consents to being impregnated? I searched my copy of the NT and can’t find it.

God is omniscient. He knows the answer is yes, so He doesn’t have to ask.

Besides, there was no penetration. God doesn’t have a penis.

[DanBlather]

@DanBlather

@FriarTed

I think the raping of Mary by one of the Trinity is a rather radical reinterpretation of the text.

Can you point me to the passage where she consents to being impregnated? I searched my copy of the NT and can’t find it.

Well I just did: I am the Lord’s servant,” Mary answered. “May it be to me as you have said.” Then the angel left her.
:smack:

[FriarTed]

@DanBlather

@DanBlather

Can you point me to the passage where she consents to being impregnated? I searched my copy of the NT and can’t find it.

Well I just did: “I am the Lord’s servant,” Mary answered. “May it be to me as you have said.” Then the angel left her.”:smack:

I was just about to post!

May I be permitted a Jack Chickian- “HAW HAW!”?

[DanBlather]

@FriarTed

@DanBlather

Well I just did: “I am the Lord’s servant,” Mary answered. “May it be to me as you have said.” Then the angel left her.”:smack:

I was just about to post!

May I be permitted a Jack Chickian- “HAW HAW!”?

I deserve it.

[raindog]

@Snarky_Kong

@raindog

I’ve never received a simple “yes”, or “no” to that question, although I’ve done everything but beg for a simple, concise one word answer.

Of course, I have a strong suspicion that there are real, unstated reasons as to why a simple “yes” or “no” is so hard to render.

But a simple “no” would have sufficed. :rolleyes:

Have you stopped beating your girlfriend? A simple yes or no will suffice.

Yes.

[The_Flying_Dutchman]

@DanBlather

@FriarTed

I was just about to post!

May I be permitted a Jack Chickian- “HAW HAW!”?

I deserve it.

But??? How old was Mary when this all went down ? Age of consent in Israel is 16.

[Snarky_Kong]

@raindog

@Snarky_Kong

Have you stopped beating your girlfriend? A simple yes or no will suffice.

Yes.

You should be imprisoned for your past crimes. Absolutely disgusting.

[raindog]

@FriarTed

raindog- I think a lot of people here really don’t know what you believe about the spiritual status of Jesus & his relationship to God. Now, I do know and realize that while you do not hold him to be God along with the Father, you also hold that he is more than just another creation. So could you explain for the rest your view of the status of Jesus & why his life is sufficient to redeem all of humanity?

Btw, I’m thinking of opening up a discussion- “Does the New Testament teach that Jesus is God & if not, what does the NT teach Jesus is?” thread.

Hello Friar Ted.

I hold that Jesus is ‘the firstborn of all creation’ and God’s Son.

As to why his life is ‘sufficient’----which I take to mean ‘In which way is he qualified?’, I would say simply it is/was his position as a perfect human life. Along the way I would note:

1. My reading of the OT doesn’t indicate that the anticipated Messiah was to be God, or any part of God. There was no expectation of God coming to earth.

2)It seems apparent to me that even his direct contemporaries didn’t grasp the notion of a propitiatory sacrifice. They were surprised and alarmed at the notion he’d be killed.

3)Its only later that Paul made the direction connection-----and more than once----that Jesus’s perfect life answered for the perfect [yet rebelling] perfect life of Adam. A perfect life for a perfect life; a redemption for human kind.

No where in my reading indicates that this perfect life had to be God, or even the Son of God. On the other hand, some divine intervention had to happen to provide a perfect human life, as the offspring of Adam could only produce imperfection.

It is a a result of love and concern for human kind that Jesus was selected/volunteered. Surely God could have made another human in the fashion he made Adam. In any event he chose to use Mary, and the result was that a perfect human life answered for Adamic sin.

[John_Mace]

@FriarTed

@DanBlather

Well I just did: “I am the Lord’s servant,” Mary answered. “May it be to me as you have said.” Then the angel left her.”:smack:

I was just about to post!

May I be permitted a Jack Chickian- “HAW HAW!”?

Wasn’t that an ex post facto announcement, though?