Well, He IS alive now and is over it, you are forgiven.
Sorry, Rev.
We (Catholic) had kind of the same thing, but the ‘worse’ sins gave your heart bigger spots that took longer to be washed away in Purgatory. And venial sins were washed away by confession and repentance, but mortal ones still left a stain only Purgatory could cleanse.
Your poor mom really is the victim of her religion if it leaves her with NO hope for your dad.
And though I don’t quite argee with your basic premise here (‘o.k., Jesus, but what have you done for me lately?’), I do think you made the tone of your post quite clear in the title. I knew what to expect when I came in.
[And I know you didn’t say that, so if my flippancy offends, I apologize.]
Whenabouts was that? When I was going through my religious information sessions (I’m too cynical now to call it education, but it strikes me as being a bit too cynical yet to call it indoctrination), we were taught that any sin could be absolved through penitence and such. Purgatory was basically for the stuff you didn’t go to confession for.
I’ve had my differences with gobear on the topics of Christ and fundamentalists, and have been frustrated with his tendency to lump all Christians together. But all you do responding with ad hominem attacks like this one is weaken your own argument.
…all you do by responding with…
Preview is my friend.
Excuse me, that’s “insensitive, arrogant, angry, big prick”, thank you very much.
Um, it’s nice that you can spell the names right, but it’s clear that you have never read the authors you enumerate, or you would not list them together as if they were all theologians, which they weren’t, or all devout Christians, which they weren’t. What the heck does Aquina’s scholastic synthesis of Aristotle and Catholic doctrine have in common with John Locke’s deism? And citing David frickin’ Hume in defense of faith? BWA-ha-ha-ha! Sugar, you need to read the “On Miracles” section of Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding and get back to me.
You should be, so listen and learn, and maybe you won’t appear such a complete wally next time. There are intelligent defenses to be made for religious faith, but those would appear to be beyond your limited capacity.
That’s not really my premise, but I can see maybe how one would think it was.
I guess my main premise is that although Jesus probably suffered a great deal, my Mom acts as if it were the greatest suffering that was ever endured. Or that He’s still suffering. My point is that much greater suffering has taken place, and Jesus is not only no longer suffering, but he’s been in paradise (according to her beliefs) for 20 centuries.
I fail to see the need to shed tears about the suffering Jesus endured. I would gladly endure crucifixion if I knew there’d be a guaranteed eternity in paradise afterwards. Heck, I might do it for a few decades of paradise, then nothingness.
Thanks for the defense, but I do not lump all Christians together. If other people continue to read “all Christians” when I write “fundamentalist,” t’ain’t my problem, ya dig?
Gobear–
Actually, it’s “Of Miracles”, not “On Miracles”. 
Perhaps if you read Four/Five Dissertations, specifically “Natural History of Religion”, you might be able to use his arguments instead of painting Christianity with such an ignorant and broad brush.
The connection between the men I listed is that they were all intelligent philosophers who rigorously studied religion. Of course they came to different conclusions; the point is that they, unlike you, actually had the brainpower to tackle the issue of religion without making ridiculously simplistic comments.
Really, the fact that you read is impressive; the fact that you cannot make an intelligent argument is not.
Hey, that’ll teach me not to quote from memory.
But, please, elucidate where I painted Christianity with an ignorant and broad brush? Because I have problems with the Atonement? Details, please.
And if I had the luxury of writing a large tome instead of a short post, perhaps I would take a more nuanced path of expressing my belief that religion, all religion, is repressive superstition, or as Penn & Teller put it, “bullshit”.
I only pick on Christianity because it’s the devil I know–I have equal dislike for Islam, Hinduism, Taoism, and every other belief system that embraces imaginary deities.
Well, then, teach me. I am ever eager to learn.
As you wish:
“So Jesus got crucified? So what?..What kind of insane, evil deity demands blood atonement from an innocent guy–God’s own Son!–for the sins of the world?”
“Whose bright idea was it to set up a universe where killing people is the only way to atone for sins like skipping church and watching porn?”
“First, how can you kill God? An eternal, immortal being can’t also be a temporal, mortal being–it’s a logical contradiction. Moreover, Jesus knew that He would resurrect, so all He really gave up was a weekend. Heck, Army reservists do that regularly.”
"Killing Jesus on the pretext of atoning for sins that hadn’t even been committed yet (that’s assuming the existence of sin in the first place) also makes no sense. "
“Again, killing innocent people to punish guilty people is no way to run a justice system–and exactly why do humans deserve to be killed by a Divine Bully, anyway?”
“That begs the question of why was the Atonement* necessary. God sacrificed Himself to Himself to satisfy rules that He made?”
So instead of taking the time and energy (though certainly fruitless in your case) to seriously consider all aspects of Christianity, you think it’s okay to call it “bullshit”?
So despite the fact that you don’t know much about other religions, you feel comfortable lumping them all together and dismissing them because they “embrace imaginary deities”? Is that fighting ignorance?
As someone once said (on this board – parapharsing), even if you win an argument with a moron, you’ve still only won an argument with a moron. Besides, in your case I think you’re just too angry to listen to reason.
Btw, I’d like to expand on my last sentence. I think (and now it’s my turn to be a bit simplistic) that many people are extremely angry at the way Christianity has been hijacked by some idiots. I know I am. This is why I brought up the gay issue in my first post. The way folks use religion to justify hate and persecution is enough to make my blood boil.
But that doesn’t mean that folks should dismiss the entire religion. Using one extremely simplified argument, and focusing only on the Atonement, is no way to fight against the evils that pervade Christianity.
The whole damn thing is just too complex for such nonsense.
If you read the Gospels, I’m quite sure you’ll see that Jesus’ overriding message was of love, not eternal damnation. Revtim’s mom seems not to have gotten that point.
Um, you do realize that the OP is Pitting his Mom, right? And you’re worried about me being “abrasive” for criticizing her theology?
But all you did was merely quote what I wrote–aren;t you going to refute it?
Do you have no problem with the idea of killing as atonement? Couldn’t an all-wise, all-knowing deity have devised a less gooey method for reconciling sinners to Himself?
I said Christianity is the devil I know; it’s the dominat relgion in this country. That you take that to mean that I know nothing of other religions is stupid in the extreme, and very, very, wrong.
And yes, your deities are imaginary. If you wish to believe in gods and devils, fine, but there’s no reason to respect your belief as anything other than delusion. I disbelieve in Jesus for the same reason you disbelieve in Mithras or Krishna.
And I notice that I have made a reasoned arguemtn agiant the central doctrine of Christianity, that killing an innocnet person as an act of atonement directly contradicts any common sense notion of justice. Leander has only responded with name-calling and an inane reach for authority, yet I’m the moron.
I’m waiting for a coherent argument in defense of your faith.
Wrong. I was venting responses to her that I cannot actually say to her without making her worry about me.
Should I start listing the authors and theologians I’ve read? To what purpose? Christianity or any other religion adds nothing to my life so I don’t need it. It’s absurd that you criticise gobear for focusing on “the Atonement” when it is the central tenet of the faith. Without “the Atonement” then there is no need for the religion. Now look at what that is. Some omnipotent God set up a system whereby a blood sacrifice is needed in order for him to offer forgiveness to the creatures he created. And we’re supposed to respect that?
Well, yeah, because if you don’t, he’ll burn you in hell for all eternity. See, when you make all the rules, you get to decide how people feel about them, and if they don’t like that, you get to torture them for however long you like.
That’s one of the problems I have with religion in general. You have a god/gods who creates everything, makes all the rules, then never really comes out and says what they are. You’ve got any number of halfwits out there screaming that they know all about god(s), and they’ve got this book (or books) which tell you all about it, yet none of them can really agree on anything, other than they hate the folks who don’t believe as they do.
I’m not saying that religion is a bad thing, but certainly some of it’s advocates have been the foulest things to walk the Earth. A being or beings so powerful that they can create everything in the universe, are by default, going to be beyond human comprehension. The best any of us can do is to select rules which enable us to survive while doing the least amount of deliberate harm to others. If we follow them to the best of our ability, then any being which won’t allow us to have an eternal reward of great happiness isn’t worth worshipping to begin with, because in all likelihood, they’re going to be deliberately out to make us suffer just for the sheer hell of it. After all, they made us, and they know we can’t comprehend the fullness of their existence, so they can’t expect us to have an accurate understanding of who they are or what they want from us.
For the last fucking time, that is NOT what you said originally. One more fucking time:
If people means “you and me, you know, people”, then what you said originally would mean “Whose bright idea was it to set up the universe where killing you and me is the only way to atone for sins like skipping church and watching porn?”
No amount of invective thrown in my direction is going to change the original quote.
I’m (sincerely) sorry, I should have clarified my position and the word “dismiss”.
I have no problem with anyone NOT believing in Christianity, or any other religion for that matter. If it has no place in your life, and adds nothing, then IMHO there’s nothing wrong with that.
What I do have a problem with is people attacking, mocking, patronizing and generally trying to toss aside (“dismiss”) all forms of religion for all people. Just because it doesn’t work for you doesn’t mean it doesn’t for everyone. (And thus the above tangent in re: hate and anger.)
So when gobear, who is (justifiably so) pissed off at fundies who attack him for who he is, turns around and attacks ALL Christians and uses a simplistic argument to defame and ridicule the entire religion, it naturally causes me to raise an eyebrow. Which is why I wrote my first post.
(And for anyone who doesn’t think he was attacking ALL Christians I invite you to read his mocking posts and change the subject to something which may be close to your heart…)
As for this Atonement argument – let me ask you, do you know who St. Anselm is? Ever heard of the Anselmian theory developed by Luther? How about the ransom theory? Know who Peter Abelard is?
If you do, then you most certainly know that this issue (Atonement) is extremely complex, given to many theories and interpretations, and one which has been explored in great detail by men much smarter than you or I.
It might be nice to learn a bit about this before arguing, as Gobear has, in such simple terms.
That being said, if you wish to “dismiss” Christianity without understanding, as you have no use for it and just don’t believe, that’s your perogative. And I feel no anger or ire towards you.
Just don’t “dismiss” it in a pejorative manner, using a stupidly simplistic argument, without some knowledge. K?