I invite you to pick apart Christianity

[Qre:us]

There's still a fundamental question. Why the hell did God bother with man in the first place?

And, another, why not make man perfect to begin with? Why this need to make him a sinner spending the rest of his life redeeming for his sin (an impossible quest)?

 

[Athenian200]

That's not really fair, and, kind of childish, as it's not a relevant argument, as it assumes that the way ThinkingAboutIt conceives god is wrong. It's wrong to you. It's probably quite right to a whole group of others. There wouldn't be any discussion in this thread, without theists who BELIEVE responding to those of us who don't. That's the whole point of this thread. I don't think he/she picked on YOU for not capitalizing god.

Why would you harp on such an irrelevant issue? For the dull sake of being able to pick on someone? Does it make you feel good putting another down for irrelevant things? Joking sarcasm or not.

Well, it's just annoying. I mean, it makes sense for someone who believes in god to capitalize the word "God." I'm fine with that. But it drives me insane to see someone capitalize a personal pronoun other than "I." It's just incorrect usage. That's not an accepted spelling convention, even among Christians. It was used in the Bible, but that doesn't make it appropriate in modern English. It would be like going around saying "thou" instead of "you."

 

[Virtual ghost]

And, another, why not make man perfect to begin with? Why this need to make him a sinner spending the rest of his life redeeming for his sin (an impossible quest)?

Or why rate sins as sins ?

Or Why are the sins the ones they are and not some other things ?
(the answer on this one could be interesting)

 

[Qre:us]

Well, it's just annoying. I mean, it makes sense for someone who believes in god to capitalize the word "God." I'm fine with that. But it drives me insane to see someone capitalize a personal pronoun other than "I." It's just incorrect usage. That's not an accepted spelling convention, even among Christians.

How do you know this as fact?
Many European languages capitalize nouns and pronouns used to refer to God: hallowed be Thy name, look what He hath done. Some English authors capitalize any word referring to God: the Lamb, the Almighty; some capitalize "Thy Name".
(Wiki - Capitalization)
Capitalization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It was used in the Bible, but that doesn't make it appropriate in modern English. It would be like saying "thou" instead of "you."

What's appropriate, by whose standard?

 

[ThinkingAboutIt]

You got it right.

But that is not all.
On wife that is stealing from stores and billions of dead people and destroyed biosphere are not exactly the same thing.

I simply don't inderstand why would God create a tool for wiping of milions and millions of devoted christians.

In the case that God is behind this I must rise a question " Does he really love us as he/she/it claims? " (In the case that God exists in the first place.)

Does the one she stole from agree with your perspective? We each see with limited and different perspectives. And, that perspective often revolves around self. God is onmiscient and sees it all, from every person, every aspect, every perspective, along with every consequence of every decision - everything.

God does give the knowledge; He gives the knowledge and skill to heal, but that knowledge and skill can be used to kill as well - that is a result of a person or persons using their free will to make a decision and the consequence of that decision. Can God intervene? Yes. Will He? If it serves His purpose, yes. If we don't have the whole picture, or all knowledge as He does, how can we properly judge Him or His decisions?...and, should the creation judge the creator?

With regard to death, again, different perspectives. A Christian is called to die to self while living on earth. That means, not my way, not my will, this is no longer my life, but Christ's to use for His purposes. And, a Christian knows that there is much, much better things waiting once physical life has ended, so death is nothing to fear; there are much better things to look forward to.

 

[ThinkingAboutIt]

Did the parent create the child's wills? Their desires? Did the parent create the child's universe and give them the tools to destroy it? Because if so, then yes, you can use this analogy. However, considering that the most involvement in creating a child that parents have active control over is whether or not they use protection, this still isn't the same. If God created everything, he created the world with specific vulnerabilities and created people with the intelligence to exploit these vulnerabilities, so unless he's a complete idiot, he is accountable.

So, if I as a parent make a decision to raise my child in a way that goes against what God said to do, I can still hold Him responsible for that? For everything that my child does regardless that it was my decision to go against Him? Then, once I am no longer responsible for the child, they too can hold God responsible for all the decisions they choose to make? No, I am responsible for my choices and actions - and the consequences of them. If we have the ability to choose, we have to take responsibility for those choices and actions.

 

[Athenian200]

How do you know this as fact?
Many European languages capitalize nouns and pronouns used to refer to God: hallowed be Thy name, look what He hath done. Some English authors capitalize any word referring to God: the Lamb, the Almighty; some capitalize "Thy Name".
(Wiki - Capitalization)
Capitalization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia is user-edited, and as such reflects how things are done (at best), not how they should be done. Besides, notice it says "some" authors. It's quite possible that those authors are incorrect.

What's appropriate, by whose standard?

I happen to know that this particular "standard" didn't even appear until a particular translation of the Bible appeared in 1971. Even the Bibles before that didn't use that capitalization.

I can't give you an authoritative source (the Internet not having many of those), but several grammar handbooks would condemn this usage as nonstandard. I also know that it only appears in American usage (presumably due to the influence of those two new revised translations that appeared here). It makes us appear more backwards to the rest of the world than we already do.

Even many of the Christians who use it say that they know it's technically incorrect, but insist on using the incorrect form out of "respect." That's extremely annoying, but they do it anyway. I think they do it because they know it gets to me.

I'm sorry, this is just a pet peeve of mine. I probably should learn to reign in my "grammar nazi" tendencies. They probably make me seem a little closed-minded.

 

[garbage]

yeah when you're down into the grammar i think it's safe to say that you've picked apart christianity about as much as you possibly ever can

 

[Ojian]

Originally Posted by Aerithria View Post
God created the universe with the tools necessary for nuclear weapons. You did not create your wife, so the fact that she is capable to shoplift has nothing to do with you. However, the fact that nuclear weapons can be created has everything to do with God, for making them have the ability to exist in the first place.

Now, had you said pet robot...
You got it right.

But that is not all.
On wife that is stealing from stores and billions of dead people and destroyed biosphere are not exactly the same thing.

I simply don't inderstand why would God create a tool for wiping of milions and millions of devoted christians.

In the case that God is behind this I must rise a question " Does he really love us as he/she/it claims? " (In the case that God exists in the first place.)

I'm sorry, but this argument is really weak. Just because someone creates something, and somebody else uses it for a purpose that most would consider evil, does not make the original creator responsible for how it is used. Most things made, even those attributed to God, can be used for good or bad purposes, but it doesn't mean the creator intended for them to be used that way.

A guy can make a pen for writing. If someone comes by and uses a pen to stab someone in the eye, it's not the pen-makers fault or cause.

One could say that God created fire. Fire can be used to keep someone warm, cook his food, melt and purify metal, etc...to a thousand uses. But if a fire is used by someone to burn down a family in their home, it's God's fault?

God did not create nuclear weapons. He may have created the physical processes that make nuclear fission/fusion possible. But just because some men can make use of those processes for nefarious purposes does not make God responsible. The 'destructive' nuclear forces also benefit man. Without them, the sun would not burn and life would not exist on earth. Man, even though usually corrupt and destructive, has even made use of nuclear power to provide energy for many of it's citizens, and thats usually considered a good thing.

 

[Riva]

Q: If god is all-knowing, then why the fuck would he have to incarnate himself as a man to know the human experience?

 

[Virtual ghost]

I'm sorry, but this argument is really weak. Just because someone creates something, and somebody else uses it for a purpose that most would consider evil, does not make the original creator responsible for how it is used. Most things made, even those attributed to God, can be used for good or bad purposes, but it doesn't mean the creator intended for them to be used that way.

A guy can make a pen for writing. If someone comes by and uses a pen to stab someone in the eye, it's not the pen-makers fault or cause.

One could say that God created fire. Fire can be used to keep someone warm, cook his food, melt and purify metal, etc...to a thousand uses. But if a fire is used by someone to burn down a family in their home, it's God's fault?

God did not create nuclear weapons. He may have created the physical processes that make nuclear fission/fusion possible. But just because some men can make use of those processes for nefarious purposes does not make God responsible. The 'destructive' nuclear forces also benefit man. Without them, the sun would not burn and life would not exist on earth. Man, even though usually corrupt and destructive, has even made use of nuclear power to provide energy for many of it's citizens, and thats usually considered a good thing.

I am afraid that it is your argument that is weak.

Which is because we are talking about God and not about another human being. God is omnipresent and all knowing. He/she/it knew exactly what will happen if he creates reality like ours.
Especially since he could have created anything he wanted.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Does the one she stole from agree with your perspective? We each see with limited and different perspectives. And, that perspective often revolves around self. God is onmiscient and sees it all, from every person, every aspect, every perspective, along with every consequence of every decision - everything.

God does give the knowledge; He gives the knowledge and skill to heal, but that knowledge and skill can be used to kill as well - that is a result of a person or persons using their free will to make a decision and the consequence of that decision. Can God intervene? Yes. Will He? If it serves His purpose, yes. If we don't have the whole picture, or all knowledge as He does, how can we properly judge Him or His decisions?...and, should the creation judge the creator?

With regard to death, again, different perspectives. A Christian is called to die to self while living on earth. That means, not my way, not my will, this is no longer my life, but Christ's to use for His purposes. And, a Christian knows that there is much, much better things waiting once physical life has ended, so death is nothing to fear; there are much better things to look forward to.

Does this means that if your god orders you to wipe out a village that this a right thing to do ?

 

[Snow Turtle]

I am afraid that it is your argument that is weak.

Which is because we are talking about God and not about another human being. God is omnipresent and all knowing. He/she/it knew exactly what will happen if he creates reality like ours.
Especially since he could have created anything he wanted.

What exactly is the problem with allowing people to do what they want? Would you have prefered a robot like community where nobody could choose what they want?

 

[Thalassa]

Yes, now we're getting to the crux of what I'm trying to say (which, you're not getting...we are missing each other, it seems).

They're ALL man-made ideologies. Hence, it can be used as a vehicle for good and bad, because if it was by divine intervention, it would be perfection in truth. It would not be culturally applicable (the bible mentions slavery and how to treat them, all apostles were men, the big women figures, were the Virgin Mary and Mary Magdalena...and, very much so tied to the time's significance of women, tied predominately to their sexuality). It would surpass any of these cultural limitations of the time to be relevant throughout...and not for us to rely on debates of interpretive differences during modern times. As such, we can only use ONE or the OTHER as an argument.

(1) X ideology allows for interpretation. As such, certain people within the ideology tainted it - towards good, towards bad.

Or

(2) X is an ideology that has good merits and bad merits.


If (1) and we are speaking of Christianity, it really calls into question this notion of God's words/divine intervention, unless we allow god to be less than perfect. As such, he/she/it was short-sighted enough to write only to the culture at the time, allow for ambiguity, etc, etc.

If (2) then god is not goodness. God is good and bad.

We can't use the ideology as an indisputable truth, and excuse the bad instances as those that went astray and the good as those that TRULY understood it. This is the bias I speak of. Use the same evaluating scale for the good and the bad. Or don't use the scale at all as a gold standard.

Okay - you and I agree, somewhat. However, I do see the teachings of Jesus as divine intervention, and of course in matters of faith and belief this is inarguable because naturally we will never come to an agreement because of the nature of the argument.

But I do agree that the way that the Bible has been abused and interpreted as a whole is all too human. It appears to me that some people, instead of viewing the Bible as a whole get stuck on very early chapters like Leviticus, use old Jewish laws to harrass other people, and totally miss out on all of the stuff in the New Testament about love being the law, and love thy neighbor, and forgive, and do not judge lest ye be judged, and no man is capable of fulfilling the law which is why forgiveness is necessary. There is also "neither Jew nor Greek" which is a great statement against any sort of racism, nationalism, etc. The Bible is full of remarkably egalitarian, "modern" ideas within the teachings of Jesus. I think it is important to look back on the Old Testament with the New Testament firmly in mind so it can be interpreted correctly as a history of how human beings are all flawed. The reason why many "men of God" sometimes did bad things in the Old Testament is not to justify those bad things, but simply to prove that even spiritual people have a selfish, imperfect human nature.

Of course, like I said before, I know you aren't going to agree with me in my beliefs, but I did feel it necessary to explain a little more fully.

 

[Sniffles]

The Bible is full of remarkably egalitarian, "modern" ideas within the teachings of Jesus.

Egalitarian certainly when understood in a metaphysical sense, but the "modern" perversion of these teachings is to claim that this somehow applies in the earthly realm. That simply is not so. It should be noted that the term hierarchy was actually coined by the Christian writer Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, when talking about the ordering of Angels.

The connection between Christianity and worldly egalitarianism probably dates to the heretical teachings of the renegade Medieval monk Joachim of Fiore; who taught that the coming "Age of the Holy Spirit" would be one of perfect equality between all humans, without churches and other institutions.

 

[Ojian]

Which is because we are talking about God and not about another human being. God is omnipresent and all knowing. He/she/it knew exactly what will happen if he creates reality like ours.
Especially since he could have created anything he wanted.

I wouldnt agree with that assessment, though it may go contrary to the commonly held 'Christian' beliefs. But it depends on what you mean by "omnipresent" and "all knowing".

If God is "all knowing" in that he was fully aware of every detail of the future before he created anything, then yes, he would be responsible for everything that has happened, both good and bad. But that would also mean there is no such thing as free will. Everything that exists is no more than a 'robot' performing actions that they were programmed to do.

But I don't hold to that view, nor do I think is it Biblically supported. If as you say "he could have created anything he wanted", would not that include him being able to create beings with free will? If so, then despite God having the ability to look into the future, he could choose not to exercise that ability to its fullest extent and allow free will creatures to actually choose their own course. And if men do have free will, then they would be responsible for what they do and create.

 

[Son of the Damned]

Doesn't the idea of Supreme being that governs all kinda of invalidate the whole point of free will? I mean, its not really free will, since He knows what you will do before hand. And if God intervenes in human affairs, thus changing the course of events, wouldn't he be aware of all the possible consequences of any action he makes?

I'm just saying that Free will doesn't really mesh well with the "God's plan/design" thing, since we can only make the decisions he designed or wanted us to make.

 

[Sniffles]

Christianity is the religion of paradoxes.

 

[Matrik]

Christianity:
There is one God and He is the maker of heaven and earth and He made us in His image and likeness, male and female with dignity, value, worth, and purpose. He made us to worship. and we chose to sin against Him, to rebel against Him, to disobey Him. As a result we are separated from God and we live under the foolish myth that to some degree we are each our own “god” declaring right and wrong, living our own life, by our own standards. And that God loving came into human history as the man Jesus Christ - fully God and fully man - born of a virgin, and He lived a life without sin though He was tempted in every way as we are. And He went to the cross and there He substituted himself. Our first parents (Adam & Eve) in the garden substituted themselves for god and at the cross Jesus reversed that substitution and substituted himself for sinners. When Jesus went to the cross, He took willingly upon Him the sin of those who would come to trust in Him. That means me, as a sinner, Jesus went to the cross and took upon Himself all my sin, past, present, and future. Jesus Christ, God who was a man, died in my place, for my sins, paying my debt to God and purchasing my salvation. Jesus' dead body was then laid in a tomb and for three days he was buried. On the third day, a Sunday, which is why we worship on that day, Jesus rose in victory over Satan, sin, death, demons and hell. And He commissioned us with the Holy Spirit to be missionaries telling this amazingly good news, that there is a God who passionately, lovingly, continually, relentlessly, pursues us. And Jesus ascended into heaven and today He is alive and well and He is seated on a throne and He is ruling and reigning over all nations, cultures, philosophies, races, and periods of time. He is ruling over moderns and post-moderns, women and men, those who are living and those who are dead, those who have been born and those who will be born and He is King of Kings and Lord of Lords and He is ruling and reigning over all people commanding anyone everywhere to repent of everything, and He is coming again to judge the living and the dead and those who trust in Him will enjoy an eternity in His kingdom of heaven forever and those who do not will suffer apart from him in the conscious, eternal torments of hell.



What are your objections and reasons for objecting Christianity? What do you believe to be true? Do you believe in truth? Do you believe in a god? Do you believe in the God presented above? What about the gospel is so offensive?

If you feel that I completely missed some major piece of Christianity please explain where and how it is important as so far as "salvation" goes.

Need one more proof than to look at the vast amount of creation which man could not create himself?

Religion is what man thinks of God. It is a circuitous thinking, self-contained, and is not created by God. What does that get one? Somewhere shy of a self-fulfilling prophecy, but not quite a self-fulfilling prophecy. It is an artificial comfort, one which is selfish.

It is a waste of time and a deflection from focus on fulfillment.

 

[Snow Turtle]

I wouldnt agree with that assessment, though it may go contrary to the commonly held 'Christian' beliefs. But it depends on what you mean by "omnipresent" and "all knowing".

If God is "all knowing" in that he was fully aware of every detail of the future before he created anything, then yes, he would be responsible for everything that has happened, both good and bad. But that would also mean there is no such thing as free will. Everything that exists is no more than a 'robot' performing actions that they were programmed to do.

But I don't hold to that view, nor do I think is it Biblically supported. If as you say "he could have created anything he wanted", would not that include him being able to create beings with free will? If so, then despite God having the ability to look into the future, he could choose not to exercise that ability to its fullest extent and allow free will creatures to actually choose their own course. And if men do have free will, then they would be responsible for what they do and create.

An alternative idea is that God is not binded by time, and sees the future past and present as one point. He is present at every moment, therefore knows all what will occur and can occur in the future.

A christian friend gave me the example: We know what we did in the past as a child, but does that mean we did not have free will then?