ExChristian.Net -- encouraging ex-Christians - Latest Comments in Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

XpastorDan — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 11:09:47 -0000

R. Mc Fundie -

Here are some questions for you to ponder:

Who told you the Bible was God's word? Mommy, Daddy, Grandma; a man in a black robe?

How do you know that they were right? Have you ever researched it for yourself?
(and I don't mean just reading Christian apologists, ie. Josh McDowell)

What "Faith" do you suppose you would be if you had been born in ......India - perhaps Hindu? What about Iraq or Iran - how about Muslim? If born in Mongolia? .... probably Buddhist.

What if you had been born in a different era? You would undoubtedly have worshipped the Sun or a River or Mountain. Perhaps you would have sacrificed animals or even humans in the persuit of your god.

If you are truly convinced that you have the TRUTH, then why don't you put your 'faith' where your mouth is?! Why don't you go off to Syria or Pakistan and tell those poor, mis-guided, Muslim, fundamentalists that they are all wrong. Tell them that their prophet was not of God. Tell them that Jesus is the only way.
They were willing to put their "Faith" on the line, on 9/11!

I would like to see you Prove that your way, your book, your God (and his son) are the only true and real gods. Are you willing to sacrifice your life (like Stephen did in the book of Acts) to share the Truth with these lost souls? Are you willing to stare them in the face and tell them that they are on their way to hell? Or can you just do that from the safety of your bedroom, on the computer?

I challenge you to do so. I would like to see your beheading on U-Tube. Think of the Millions who would watch. Maybe a few would convert after seeing your heroic act.

What do you think, Mc Assh0le? Show some guts. Go forth in the name of your God.

XpastorDan

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

AtheistToothFairy — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 02:40:54 -0000

McDonalds Clown, errr, McMillian Fundie,

>>Baah...Baah...

Is that your idea of talking in "tongues" to us?

>>I've never seen more straw mean being lit up in my life.

Funny how your entire bible dogma and history is made up of nothing but straw men.
It's just so EASY to set them on fire and have a sing-a-long while roasting marshmallows over it's holy smoke.

>>Your arguments are like a Guy Fawkes marathon. And just like that botched conspiracy, no amount of pseudo intellectualism and turning from the plow will kill the King.

So I assume you have evidence for your King's existence, Mister Big Mouth?

>>Christ was without sin from birth until death.

So I take it that you actually knew this christ then and followed him around on earth, to be sure he never had out of wedlock sex or cussed at a fig tree etc.?

>> And like the sin offerings mandated by the Old Testament Law, he was without blemish

Now if only your silly bible book was without blemishes huh?

>> (Ezekial 43:18-25).

Oh this nutty guy.
Yeah, I recall him. He was the one who ate those funny mushrooms and saw spacemen in their flying saucers, right?

>>The question of Christs sin nature is moot.

Yeah, I'll say, because christ never existed. He was no more real than Zeus and we know that Zeus was sinless to, don't we?

>>The gospel of Luke records the many accusations leveled against him along with his responses.

And of course we know exactly who wrote "Luke", don't we.
I'm sure Luke was an upstanding citizen who would never make up fibs.

>> Every accusation from that time is baseless fantasy.Just like the Pharisees of old, you question, falsely accuse and plot against the God of creation

False!
There is no bible god to plot against.
He/She/It is just an ancient myth to appease the weak minded, like yourself for instance.

>> Know this doubters,

To doubt, would imply that I'm not sure.
Well, I can tell you that I'm 100% sure your bible god never existed, so there is no doubt to speak about here.

>>"The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness,

Have you been to this heaven you claim exists?
Also, what gives you the right to call anyone here "wicked"?

>>Jesus has spoken to you backsliders and perverters of his Truth,

Last I heard your jesus did some "backsliding" himself, with a girl named Mary.
Kinky girl, from what I've read about her.

>> If a blind man leads a blind man both will fall into a pit" (Matt 15:13-14).

Yeah, that pretty much covers you and your fellow compatriots.
The blind leading the blind in a life of delusion.

You're one very sad spectacle of how infected a human brain can become with religious delusions.

If I were in your sandals, I wouldn't come back here until you have proof for your imaginary jesus character.

ATF (Who sure hopes someone is typing for this troll, while he's confined in a straight-jacket)

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

freemanexc — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 00:04:30 -0000

Sorry to come in so late....

Jesus proves the non-existance of free will!
"One of you will betray me. One of you will deny me."

Neither Judas nor Peter had a choice/free will according to Christian teachings and their magical father.

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

Astreja — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 23:38:02 -0000

R. McMillan: "Know this doubters, 'The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness'..."

Booga Booga to you, too, R. May dear sweet Uncle Loki unconditionally format your hard drive, and may Auntie Tiamat eat your car.

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

sconnor — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 23:24:40 -0000

mcmillan,

Delusional, ranting and raving, lunatic TROLL.

You are CUCKOO!

--S.

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

boomSLANG — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 23:21:41 -0000

Oh-my-goodness!...look, Lassie, look!...someone posted some scripture! C'mon boy, let's go round up some sheep.

Oh, and we should follow a link with the words "keep believing" and "sermon", and there we will find an "objective" discussion on theology.

ROFLMAO!!! Praise Jebus!

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

R McMillan — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 17:36:11 -0000

Baah...Baah...

I've never seen more straw mean being lit up in my life. Your arguments are like a Guy Fawkes marathon. And just like that botched conspiracy, no amount of pseudo intellectualism and turning from the plow will kill the King. Long live Jesus Christ King of Kings and Lord of Lords (Rev 19:16).

Christ was without sin from birth until death. "God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God" (2 Corinthians 5:21). He is the propitious sin offering for all mankind. And like the sin offerings mandated by the Old Testament Law, he was without blemish (Ezekial 43:18-25). This is evidenced in the following scripture, "For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are, yet was without sin" (Hebrews 4:15).

The question of Christs sin nature is moot. The gospel of Luke records the many accusations leveled against him along with his responses. Every accusation from that time is baseless fantasy.Just like the Pharisees of old, you question, falsely accuse and plot against the God of creation all the time turning away those who would be saved. Know this doubters, "The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities (his eternal power and divine nature) have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse" (Romans 1:18).

Jesus has spoken to you backsliders and perverters of his Truth, "Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots. Leave them; they are blind guides. If a blind man leads a blind man both will fall into a pit" (Matt 15:13-14).

If you want a more in depth discussion about the sin nature of Christ, go to the following website.

http://www.keepbelieving.co...

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

Monkeys — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 09:56:26 -0000

I dont think webmdave is saying we have no control over our lives - he is saying we dont have "unlimited" free will.
If God valued "unlimited" free will so much as you said, that he even allows egregious suffering and misery in order to preserve it. Why then is free will in reality so limited?
The concept of "unlimited" free will is just another illusion, and its a tenuous excuse and rationalization for the real pain that is occurring in the world today.

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

Jonnyboy — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 06:36:04 -0000

I've decided to stop posting on this thread.

You are correct when you say that people can't change their natures (that's a property of natures), but even given that free will doesn't exist, I'm not sure that living my life as if I have no control over it is particularly beneficial to anyone.

Sigh. At any rate, this discussion got way bigger than I expected, and has ranged considerably further afield than I would have liked (it was never my intention to debate the existence of free will, for example). In addition, I seem to have thoroughly irritated several people, which was not my intention.

Sorry for "hijacking" your site.

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

sconnor — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 00:21:52 -0000

jonnyboy,

Perhaps you could support your accusation that I have done no original or critical thinking?

I don't have to, your words are enough evidence.

I'm with Boomslang, present evidence of your god or be gone. As of now I am finished with you.

--S.

That doesn't mean I won't jump in and out, though.

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

Barb — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 22:34:41 -0000

Johnnyboy:

"If you would like my educational history: I am an undergraduate student aiming at a Ph.D. in English Literature."

No disrespect.....but you are in for a shock. How can you hold on to a god-belief, albeit a Christian worldview, that ticks on rabid misogyny, and at the same time open your mind to a world where binaries are blurred; borders, categories, linearity, syntax and sense are up for grabs? Again, I am NOT arguing or judging you....just completely flabbergasted. I dumped Jesus for Virginia Woolf, Joseph Conrad and George Eliot. The writings of the very homosexual Michel Foucault are a bloody nail on the moral coffin of 1845. I read the poetry of Garcia Lorca and preferred his rhythm to the babblings from the beyond. After Garcia Lorca, the Bible became repulsive. I cannot read it without an ironic kick. It is impossible to read the text without the ironic context; the ironic framing. The reader rewrites the text; (author)ity is questioned.

Not debating. Just puzzled.

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

Jonnyboy — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 20:55:10 -0000

@ Tim

If you are referring to biblical "types" then I know what you're talking about.
If you are implying that the Bible's densely layered symbolism is an inadvertent result of the NT being copied wholesale from the OT, then that's a new one on me...

I might have to find these books, since this is radically different from anything I have ever heard in any lit class which remotely mentioned the Bible.

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

Tim — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 13:05:59 -0000

"If you would like my educational history: I am an undergraduate student aiming at a Ph.D. in English Literature."

Literature, eh? Then you may be shocked to know that most of the events in Jesus' life (per the gospels) were "borrowed" from, primarily, two pre-existing literary sources: The Old Testament as well as Homer's Odyssey and Iliad.

May I suggest two books along these lines? "Gospel Fictions" by Randel Helms and "The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark" by Dennis R. MacDonald.

Also, lest I just fling links at you w/o giving the indication I actually know what I'm talking about, here are just a couple of events that happened in Jesus' life followed by the source of them in the Old Testament.

NOTICE: the parallels are dense (more than 1 matching item), sequential (events happen in same chronological order), and often contain the same wording.

1. Calming The Storm

Mark 4:35-39
1. Jesus was in a boat during a storm
2. The storm was so intense it threatened to capsize the boat
3. Jesus was asleep while the storm was raging
4. The crew was afraid and woke Jesus for help
5. The sea grew calm miraculously after Jesus spoke to it
6. Once the sea had grown calm, those on the boat grew terrified

Jonah 1:4-6, 15
1. Jonah was in a boat during a storm
2. The storm was so intense it threatened to capsize the boat
3. Jonah was asleep while the storm was raging
4. The crew was afraid and woke Jonah for help
5. The sea grew calm miraculously after Jonah was thrown into it
6. Once the sea had grown calm, those on the boat grew terrified

2. Feeding the 5000

Matthew 14:13-21
1 A large group of people were gathered without food
2 Jesus told one of his disciples to feed the group
3 His disciple protested about the number of people compared to the amount of food
4 The people all received some food and were filled
5 After the meal, there was even some food left over

2nd Kings 4:42-44
1. A large group of people were gathered without food
2. Elisha told one of his disciples to feed the group
3. His disciple protested about the number of people compared to the amount of food
4. The people all received some food and were filled
5. After the meal, there was even some food left over

Now, for homework, you go read these and see if you can find dense and sequential matches between the gospel story and it's ancestor in the Old Testament.

3. Herod’s decree

4. Jesus’ last words (apparently, if you believe all 4 gospels, his last words was a veritable speech, as each gospel gives us a completely different phrase)

Tim

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

webmdave — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 06:14:59 -0000

Johnny,

Suffering is not a part of our nature, it is a part of our circumstances.

I didn't mean to imply that humans have zero capacity for choice: I chose to have a cup of coffee before opening my email. I could have chosen tea. We make choices according to our nature. When those natures are of the type that are prone to harm others (murderers, rapists, thieves, etc.), we can expect to be separated from society by the rest of society who isn't fond of suffering. When those natures are prone toward self-destruction (substance abuse, etc), we either die or find a way to resist and restrain those natures.

I most certainly can demonstrate to a reasonable degree that my philosophical position here is solid. In fact, so can you. Try to change your nature right now. Just for a week or so, adopt as part of your nature an extreme loathing for English Literature. I assume you enjoy that topic currently. Well, graft into your nature, as an experiment, a dislike for English literature. We don't choose our likes and dislikes, they choose us.

Obtaining a handle on the historical evolution of Christianity is not a specialized discipline, any more than reading the Bible on Sunday is a specialized discipline. If Christianity is the most valuable and important topic in the world with eternal ramifications, then why would any intelligent Christian make the choice to stay functionally illiterate on any aspect of it?

Perhaps actually learning about Christianity instead of "believing" in Christianity is just not a quality generally found in the nature of a typical Christian.

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

Jonnyboy — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 04:18:16 -0000

Perhaps you misunderstood. I don't mean that people want to suffer. I mean that according to webmdave's argument for the non-existence of free will, suffering is a part of human nature.

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

Jonnyboy — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 04:14:13 -0000

"Additionally, when you make statements like this, An argument against free will! I was legitimately not expecting this to come up. I am taken aback. -- It just points to your amateurish, ineptitude."

I thought it pointed to my willingness to argue on your terms, to withdraw statements I was not prepared to argue, and to critically discuss whether or not it was reasonable to maintain the existence of God.

Every time I attempt a to make strong statement I am chastised by someone on this site for not being willing to listen. When I make an attempt to listen and understand, I am chastised for not taking a definitive stance.

If you would like a definitive stance on my belief in God: I believe in the existence of God.
If you would like a definitive stance on Christianity: I'm a fan of the apostle's creed.
If you would like my debate history: I have never participated in a debate.
If you would like my educational history: I am an undergraduate student aiming at a Ph.D. in English Literature.

Perhaps you could support your accusation that I have done no original or critical thinking?

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

AtheistToothFairy — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 02:17:05 -0000

Jonnyboy: Since humans suffer, it must be in their nature to suffer

Jonnyboy,
Speaking of suffering laddie:

Your statement of suffering here, would especially be true for xtians who love to feel persecuted on behalf of this jesus and the subsequent dogma xtians assign to jesus.
It doesn't even matter if their perceived persecution is religion based or not, as they will attribute any sense of feeling persecuted as have coming directly from their association with jesus and his-holy-ways.

For instance.....

Someone could put-them-down for the type (or color) of car they drive. Of course, this xtian believes that jesus guides his/her life in great detail, so jesus would have whispered to them what model of car to purchase and they would have naturally obeyed that order.
From that day forward, they will automatically feel that anyone putting them down for their choice of car, is doing so because they surely must know that jesus told this xtian to buy that particular car over other devil-car-models.

Oddly enough, they not only can't realize that their belief in jesus had nothing to do with their being picked-on for their car choice, but they will also now relish in the suffering they endured for having obeyed the car-choice command of jesus

In a nutshell, everything and anything they do or say in life, is tied into their allegiance to jesus, so anyone who dares to put them down for anything, surely is picking on jesus and will naturally fry in hell.
The persecuted xtian of course, get's god brownie points for having endured each assault on their xtian based character etc..

ATF (Who as a former xtian, once heard jesus tell him to paint his car ultraviolet, but couldn't find that color paint; not even at the holy church thrift shop)

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

sconnor — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 00:42:00 -0000

jonnyboy,

You suggest that because people on the internet disagree with me I should roll over?

Nope, what I am telling you is, you have come ill-prepared to argue and you are going to get bombarded my more objections and arguments. Up until now, you have done nothing, but flounder around and I suspect you have not done any original thinking, let alone any real, critical thinking. You still have not made a definitive statement, on what you believe, with regard to christianity and you have not made an unequivocal, statement, describing your beliefs, in god. I feel like I am debating a freshman high school student, who was given the objective but does not believe in it, nor have you prepared yourself properly.

Additionally, when you make statements like this, An argument against free will! I was legitimately not expecting this to come up. I am taken aback. -- It just points to your amateurish, ineptitude.

Is it possible that you came into this, without having any hard-felt views and you are simply, arguing for arguing sake -- learning as you go? Perhaps, using the debating method to acquire information? Because your debating skills are less then admirable -- maybe you should just stick to asking questions or maybe go away for a couple of years and brush up on what you believe, because this is becoming monotonous -- quite boring, actually.

So maybe, yes, you should roll over, at least, until you know what you are arguing or until you know what you believe in.

--S.

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

Jonnyboy — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 22:45:13 -0000

It tells me that, as I may have mentioned before, there are at least 4 people raising objections against me, and exactly one person addressing these objections. It also tells me that people on this particular website strongly disagree with me (not entirely surprised) and feel motivated to raise objections.

You suggest that because people on the internet disagree with me I should roll over?

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

Jonnyboy — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 22:37:19 -0000

@webmdave

Do you acknowledge the non-falsifiability of your proposed deterministic world?
(out of pure curiosity?)

I''m not a close student of the history of reformation theology, and I'm not entirely sure I have time to pick up a specialized discipline in my spare time. I am, however, aware of the importance of the reformation, and of Calvin's thought.

Also, it occurred to me that if human nature controls human actions to the degree you assert, then I'm not entirely sure what the big deal is about human suffering. Since humans suffer, it must be in their nature to suffer. Since it is in human nature to suffer, then humans are fulfilling their nature by suffering. It is also inescapable, yes?

Also, of course humans can't take on the nature of a duck and fly around or grow feathers. Humanity is not all-powerful. Free choice is restricted by our nature, training, and habits. But to totally revoke the right of humanity to choose consigns humans to total passivity doesn't it? Life reduced to nothing more than the results of causes you have no control over?

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

Auracle — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 02:12:54 -0000

"When God converts a sinner and brings him into a state of grace, He frees him from his natural enslavement to sin. By God's grace alone, freely given, sinful man is enabled to will and to do what is spiritually good. However, since the old sinful nature also remains, the believer cannot consistently or perfectly will to do what is good but also wills evil (1979, p. 17)."

Sounds to me like God doesn't do a very good of "freeing" people does he? Kind of like going into a prison and unlocking the cell door and telling the prisoner "you are free to go" but then saying "oh wait, we need to keep this" and chopping off the prisoner's arm and tossing it back in the cell...or maybe slamming the cell door shut on one of the prisoner's body parts - you're kinda free. But not really.

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

webmdave — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 10:56:40 -0000

Johnny, the entire Reformation was united and built upon a foundation that was only much later generally labeled Calvinism. In fact, even St. Augustine taught that man did not have the freewill ability to obtain salvation and that salvation was entirely by grace alone and required nothing on the part of the believer to obtain the salvation. The Reformers resurrected that view 1,200 years later in opposition to Roman Catholic return to a version of Pelagianism which evolved into Arminianism. Most Evangelicals today adhere to a modified form of Arminianism, but most Evangelicals are completely ignorant of how many changes in Christian thought transpired in 20 centuries to lead to their particular version of so-called ultimate truth.

Anyway, back to our original discussion: An alcoholic may quit drinking, but his or her nature is not changed. His or her BEHAVIOR can change by sheer force of will, but the alcoholic can never magically transform into a social or casual drinker. His or her nature toward alcohol stays the same. Let’s keep in mind that alcoholism is not illegal. No one goes to jail for alcoholism. Behavior is what determines a person’s guilt or innocence in law, not their nature. Since behavior can be controlled, people are held accountable for behavior. In Christianity, I am not only condemned for my behavior, but I am condemned for possessing a sin nature. In fact, it is the sin nature, acquired through “Original Sin,” that defaults all humans to everlasting hell – condemned already, and all that baloney.

Regardless of how you "choose" to understand these concepts, you still have offered nothing in the way of evidence that your divine man-god exists and lives in a believer's pulmonary organ. Care to go there?

If you are actually interested in educating yourself about these topics, then do some studying. All you are doing here is arguing your limited understanding from the shaky foundation of one tiny branch of your personal religious indoctrination. For more on the many conflicting views of Soteriology, click here.

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

sconnor — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 10:30:33 -0000

jonnyboy,

Hehe. Calvin is only one branch of reformationist thought.

No shit Sherlock; webmdave already established that. He he te he te he -- finger twisting in my dimpled cheek. (extreme sarcasm).

--S.

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

sconnor — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 10:21:46 -0000

jonnyboy,

An argument against free will! I was legitimately not expecting this to come up. I am taken aback.

Are F-ing kidding me? Do you even know what you are arguing?

JB said, Since the strongest argument for why suffering exists is free will,

--S.

Re: Sins of the Savior - ExChristian.Net - Articles

sconnor — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 10:06:55 -0000

jonnyboy,

An alcoholic's nature is to drink. Right? Most of the time it's even in their genes. Yet alcoholics can do something not in their nature. They can refuse to drink for literally decades.

And yet they will always be an alcoholic, whether they drink or not. It's not the act of drinking, it is the disease that makes them want to drink. It is in their nature to want that drink, which they will battle their entire lives.

Can you address my arguments, specifically?

--S.