Sure you do. God tells you if you're doing it right.

Not really, since I used to believe all the same things you do. Most religious beliefs have evolved to discourage anything that challenges the beliefs themselves. Religious people are usually clear minded and rational about everything EXCEPT their beliefs. It takes a very long time to break down those kinds of barriers.

No. What would they be arguing over if they actually tried to follow Jesus' example? "No! We should give the robber this twenty! No, he'd clearly be better off with two tens!" I don't see how a bunch of people arguing about how to be nice to others is a problem.


Yes it is. (It's also not my interpretation; it's theirs. That's why they are hypocrites, see. If they interpreted the bible to mean 'be judgmental *******s', they'd still be *******s; but at least they wouldn't be hypocrites. I'd have much more respect for them.)

Those people end to be somewhat annoying.

And I don't know why it would be impossible to believe the Bible is the Word of God and also believe that dinosaurs existed.




What separates Christianity from other religions is that it's not based on what good works we have to do, but on what Jesus Christ has already done for us. As far as I know, with most (all?) religions
we have to follow various laws and rules to have any chance of eternal life, but with Christianity salvation only requires faith in Christ.

Which is what, exactly? Also, how does that invalidate all the other religions? You are saying "this belief is more correct because it is different."


So an otherwise morally reprehensible person, say a serial killer, can be saved simply by having faith in Christ? Hitler was a devout Catholic.

Also, it's not most and certainly not all religions that work that way. Maybe most modern, western religions, but religious beliefs throughout history are pretty diverse. I'm wondering if the Judeo/Christian/Muslim religions are so widespread simply because beliefs like adherence to rules and fear of damnation are an incredibly effective way for the beliefs to propagate themselves. Once someone believes they have to fight against the fear of endless suffering to break out of it.

The death and resurrection of Jesus Christ as the payment for sin.



Yes. There's a Biblical example with the thief on the cross. I wouldn't really describe myself as a morally good person either. The Bible does say that genuine faith will result in good works, but works cannot earn salvation.



I don't think his religious views were that simple.



I'm not an apologist, so I can't answer every one of your arguments.
gotquestions.org is a good website for answers from an evangelical Protestant perspective. As I already said, Christianity isn't about adherence to rules. I really can't think of any other religions that aren't about adherence to rules, although I don't know what every religious system says.

http://www.gotquestions.org/Christianity-unique.html

Chris Sligh, a Christian singer, wrote this in a blog post recently (this is near the end of the post, it's pretty long because he's writing about being raised Independent Baptist):

Who's sin? Original sin? Are you talking about a literal interpretation of Adam and Eve (biologically impossible) or something metaphorical?


He was forgiven because of his acknowledgement of wrong doing, not just for believing in Jesus himself.


...and? He talks about how he likes it as a religion, it does nothing to verify Christianity as correct in any way. It just makes him feel good. He cites the Bible as a source -- a source that is notoriously unreliable, factually inaccurate and by all accounts of historical linguistics, entirely written by men. So, no better than any other religious text.

Also, this is frightening:

What a disturbing example of moral narcissism. "I don't have to be the best person I can, I just have to love Jesus and everything will be okay!" What a great way to not worry too closely about your own actions, to not have to fully evaluate your own ethics. It encourages people to only live by one absolute requirement in their beliefs -- acceptance of Christ. Anything else doesn't matter.

Everyone's sin - Adam's sin, Eve's sin, our sin. Everyone is a sinner.



You're right about that; I should have clarified. Admitting your own sinfulness is considered to be part of salvation.



Notoriously unreliable according to what? I'm genuinely curious to know.



I don't think that's what he's saying. He's saying that no matter how "good" he tries to be, he can't be good enough to earn salvation. I've tried to be "good", and the best person I can be in my own strength is still a sinner.

here's a bit from Romans that I think ca help clear that up a bit.

" 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith."

In the old testimant provide a blood sacrifice for the atonement of wrong doing. According to Christianity, Jesus provided the final blood sacrifice providing atonement for all who sought forgiveness and would accept that sacrifice.


Which kind of nullifies the hitler was a devout catholic theory, more likely he acted like a devout catholic. Not that Im a huge fan of catholacism.


ok clearly anyone who actually believes that is delusional. Nothing that constitutes a Christian text says that you can go around killing infants and the elderly and have everything be ok because you "love Jesus"

This answers absolutely nothing. Alright, we're all sinners. By what standard? Didn't we just establish that Christianity has no "rules" to follow? If so, what is right and wrong, who defines it?



That is exactly what it says. There is no complete moral guideline, only that one must accept Christ. Let's even stretch it and say that you must also follow the teachings of Christ. But as Flirbnic already pointed out, what constitutes something that Christ would agree with is not something that can be determined objectively because it is open to interpretation. That means you could do a lot of things that are morally despicable but still love Jesus and "follow his teachings" if you can find a loophole.

MASSASSI:

Republicans and Christians beware!

This is actually a good discussion, **** off.

Absolutely, this has been a great, calm thread discussing things intellectual with no flames and such... till you posted.

Oh emon, always getting your panties in a bunch. Chill out.

I'm not flaming deadman, I don't see your logic. Merely shaking my head at this age old beaten topic here on the boards. I remember days when admin would auto lock threads like these. I don't understand the need to turn over stones we've been at millions of times before. No one is going to get emon to believe in Christianity and conversely, emon Isnt going to get someone to renounce their faith so I don't much see the point in these conversations. Its like android and iPhone users arguing with one another. Why can't we all believe what we want to and find out who was correct when we die?

Hey you can discuss whatever your heart desires, I'm just saying i dont get these types of threads.

See my above response to Alran.


We can start with the fact that there's only been one historical account of Jesus outside of the Bible. There's no Roman record of him existing or ever being crucified nor any of his acts. The gospels themselves contradict each other on account of the events leading up to the crucifixion. For example, in Mark the two thieves are mentioned but they never speak. In Matthew, the thieves taunt Jesus. In John they aren't described as thieves. In reality, the Romans never crucified thieves.

And that's just one bit from the New Testament. Most interesting to me is how historical linguistics show how the Torah were derived from originally independent, complete narratives which were combined into the current form by several different editors. Even the writing itself isn't anything new -- stories about creation (of which there are two that contradict each other) and the worldwide flood were probably lifted from other, earlier mythologies. FFS, hell isn't even mentioned in the Old Testament! Where did that horrific idea come from??

There's pretty much no corroborating evidence for anything in the entire book. It's self referential (which is reason enough to ignore it), contradictory and just outright bad. Even Jesus condones the laws of Moses, instructing people to kill their children for disobeying him, among other things. It runs contradictory the good things he taught, which strongly suggests it wasn't authored by a single voice.

You don't remember those days because they didn't exist. In fact, we had a whole forum dedicated to this.


The nuances of this discussion, to my knowledge have not been discussed on Massassi, or at least not in a very long time. And not among the people currently engaged in the discussion.


No one is going to change their mind after one discussion. That isn't the point. But a good exchange of ideas is beneficial to both parties.


What a profoundly stupid and intellectually lazy thing to say. Public policy is shaped by the religious. Buildings are blown up by the religious. It matters.


That's because you have no idea the implications that these types of discussions really have. It's not about who's right and who's wrong.

And if you don't like it so much, why not just get out?

For one, I'm pretty sure in the days of blujay and other ban happy admins the religious debates were heavily monitored and usually locked down quickly. Maybe you forgot.

As for the rest, I'm not going to argue with you, as your a royal pain in the ass most days of the week. Yeah, yeah, you'll call it a lame cop out excuse because I have no argument blahblahblah, but if its something else I've observed over the years its that arguing with you is like eating rice with chopsticks grain by grain.

All I have to say, is if you're having to eat rice grain by grain with chopsticks, you're using the wrong rice. I think that's actually a great metaphor for this thread as well.

Sounds to me like you're using the chopsticks wrong.
Invest in a fork, they're better anyway

I find it odd Emon didnt address this point.

They may be better for you, but some people can use chopsticks better than forks. I know that when stopped relying on chopsticks for every meal, it was pretty liberating. Trying to eat broth and oatmeal especially was awful before, but now that I've realized that I don't need to limit myself to one form of utensil, I'm a much happier diner.

That doesn't count. Blujay banned someone for not liking baseball.

The religious debates then were basically god botherers and god haters screaming at each other.

The only negative aspect of this thread so far is you, and how we all hate you now.

So sorry to take the title from you JM.

Your right! There is no ten commandment style litmus test of what sin IS in the new testament. There are however, multiple examples of what is right, or righteous given, often by Jesus. There are also many examples of how you should NOT conduct yourself.
Bottom line is if your really looking for how you should live your life according to "Christianity" you can find it. And if you are looking to make a "got ya!" point you can find reasons for that as well.
Again, I am not what would be defined as a practicing Christian, but I do think there are many, many good things about the teachings of Christ.

Jesus tells a family to kill their children for disobeying them, and you think it's a good idea to follow his moral advice? All of his good teachings are completely non-unique to Christianity and existed long before the Bible was written.

I just don't get why you'd even bother clinging to it. There's no evidence the Bible wasn't written entirely by people for whom a wheel barrow was an emerging technology. No evidence that the events portrayed actually happened. It's no more useful as a moral guidebook and no more historically accurate than the Iliad.

That explains it pretty well.



I should have clarified that. God has given laws. However, the purpose of the law isn't to save us, but to show us our sinfulness and inability of keeping the law. http://www.gotquestions.org/Christian-law.html

Just looking at the Ten Commandments, I'm sure everyone has broken at least one (I have, at least). They're not rules to follow to get in to heaven, because we can't follow the rules. Jesus said that the law can be summed up as "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your mind, and love your neighbor as yourself", and no one does that.

1.



The only requirement for salvation is faith in Christ, but faith should result in the desire to follow His teachings and law. Because of the sin nature, though, even Christians will not do that perfectly.



Where does He say that? I can't remember it anywhere.

I believe Jesus was actually talking to religious leaders, and not actually telling them to kill their children. He and his disciples were being chastised for not following an obscure law from the old testament. Jesus was pointing out their hypocrisy as they themselves did not kill disobedient children as the old testament law required.

Mark:
7:9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
"Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death."
7:10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:


Matthew:
15:4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.
15:5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;
15:6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

Here is, perhaps, a more unambiguous example of something morally unsound from the new testament:

Matthew 19:29 And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

It hits close to home: My grandmother joined a church and at one point said, "this is my family now", pretty well disowning her actual family.

So is no one going to bother addressing the fact that the Bible is a worthless collection of stories with absolutely no corroborating evidence? Your faith is no more valid than thousands of others. Most religions claims two things: some book or teachings that are held to be sacred and absolute (word of god, etc) and personal divine experiences. How do you account for the many different religious texts, all claiming to be correct, and all of their followers who have profound experiences?

Your grandmother got lost somewhere!

Jesus didn't talk about renunciation, he taught non-attachment (surrender) as a way to peace, joy, freedom (which none of us know a thing about, although we of course pretend, including our grandmothers :p).

Meaning of that verse: Don't be attached to anything, not even family or your home. Be ready to let everything go and you'll have everlasting (not time-perduring after this life in some kind of cloud city like everyone believes, but TIMELESS).

The New Testament ends with "wolves in sheep's clothing" nailing decency to a cross and him forgiving and not fighting back. ULTIMATELY surrendered and free beyond compare (note: not the ****ty "home of the brave" kind of free or the religion kind of free which is of course unfree.)

Note the apotheosis of the New Testament: the single free and happy and decent person of his time shared the dinner table with prostitutes, murderers and thieves and got along just fine with them, but was murdered by RELIGIOUS people with their ****ty books of judgment in hand. Nothing changed, although of course these psychopaths say they 'walk with god' or are 'born again' or something.

Sounds oddly familiar.
Freedom from Attachment.

That's for sure.



And here you highlight one of the reasons the bible is useless as a source of moral insight: Any meaning derived from it is dependent on subjective interpretation. You give as much meaning to it as it communicates.

Furthermore, it's subjective interpretation of text written by ordinary human beings who have no more inherent moral insight than anyone else.

Emon - don't torture yourself like this - the Bible has little to no factual basis. Not in biology or geology or history etc...

Right now, not being remotely theist in any classical sense of the word, I have come to appreciate the Bible though.

It begins with paradise: inner peace, love, joy, etc... the REAL thing as opposed to our fakery. We don't know anything about this realm, except in brief moments of timeless grace which we have all experienced (although this I-sense was invariably gone in those moments - things and actions just flowed)

Then a snake, a voice whispers to us from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Which is just another way of saying 'Tree of Judgment'. This snake of judgment is talking in our heads most of the day trying to convince us to judge and condemn and hate and say 'thing/person/event A is good and thing/person/event B is bad'. With this psychological illness ("the devil", "ego", etc...) , paradise ends and now plagues, hate, fire and brimstone enter the picture.

This is the state we are in now - if you think you aren't, just watch your ****ty, hostile face and your internal flames ("hell") next time someone cuts in front of you in traffic or something. You're in hell all day long. I know all of this because I'm in that same hell. This hell IS internal torture, sleepless nights, headaches, walking around in a daze with hollow eyes. This is the state of the whole world (including all of you). Brood of vipers. Wolves in sheep's clothing. All extremely hostile and unhappy pretending to be decent and happy. I know all about it first hand btw!

This hell ends when you FORGIVE, AFTER the day of the LAST JUDGMENT (I don't think it can be any clearer than this) this internal hell calms down and you move to heaven/the kingdom (peace and joy, an internal sense of timelessness, etc ....) again. So, you forgive and stop judging not because you're a saint or something, but because you're sick of this eternal torture. This is what Jesus teaches. Turn the other cheek, forgive, love, etc... and you'll be in heaven. Your day is full of opportunities for this, but we of couse squander them all the time, lashing out and thus feeding the internal flames some more, suffering till the day we die.

Now a question - who of you RIGHT now has a voice in his/her head telling you to strike at this post: telling me off, putting me down (and you "up"), making a sarcastic, hostile comment? Who will be the first dude NOT to indulge that demon and actually have a truly happy, free life? What about the guy who cuts in front in traffic? What about the wife who cheats on you? That to me is what the Bible teaches, as do Marcus Aurelius, Epictetus, Buddha, Lao Tzu, etc...

Not unlike the Tao te Ching, Tarot, Runes, reading tea leaves, and so on. If you stare long enough at it, you'll eventually answer your own question based on your own assumptions.

Does this make it worthless? Maybe, maybe not. Just so long as people reading the Bible can realize they're not going to find any insight/justifications in there that they aren't wanting to find.

Yep, that's the wonder of it all when you read through world literature and philosophy. This Jesus guy was not inherently unique (sorry to all the Jesus-fanatics :P) - he discovered something which others have discovered as well. Extremely practical for how to live a happy, stress-free life (instead of pretending).

If that's all you're in it for, then almost any other system of belief or philosophy from Taoism to the Lion King grants it in a more internally consistent, tolerant, lower-baggage package which is significantly less likely to justify the sort of uneducated fanatic bigotry and crippling shame, xenophobia, and sexual repression that is endemic in Christianity.

Of course, I completely agree. That's why I mentioned this: the one truly decent person was murdered by RELIGIOUS people, kings of judgment. It couldn't be more clear, and more prophetic.

You could even include novels in that list. In fact, you'll probably find more useful moral insight reading a Neal Stephenson or William Gibson novel than the Bible, since it's more relevant to the culture we live in, and might make you think about ethics with regards to modern technologies, for example.