Username Taken wrote:

StroppyChops wrote:

Username Taken wrote:A born-again Christian once told me that it's ok to sin, because 'G' knows that we are only human and He will forgive us unconditionally.

This obviously didn't sound right to you... ?

Too right! Do you want to justify that statement for me?

Not even a little bit. I'm with you on this.

I am assuming that 'to sin' means to lie, cheat, steal, murder, covet the neighbours wife, etc.

Actually I find it helps to think of biblical sin as a state of being rather than a verb - there are no degrees of sin, no-one is a greater or lesser sinner than the next person.

StroppyChops wrote:

Username Taken wrote:

StroppyChops wrote:

Username Taken wrote:A born-again Christian once told me that it's ok to sin, because 'G' knows that we are only human and He will forgive us unconditionally.

This obviously didn't sound right to you... ?

Too right! Do you want to justify that statement for me?

Not even a little bit. I'm with you on this.

I am assuming that 'to sin' means to lie, cheat, steal, murder, covet the neighbours wife, etc.

Actually I find it helps to think of biblical sin as a state of being rather than a verb - there are no degrees of sin, no-one is a greater or lesser sinner than the next person.

So what's the point, in the end? Apparently the entire bible is open to personal interpretation...Hmmm... and to get drunk excessively (apparently a sin) is the same degree as murdering 12 people and eating them. If there is "sin" (a big "if" for me as an agnostic) I can't believe they are all considered the "same degree". Plus, angels and sprites and ghosts and pixies didn't write the bible - men did - by committee to be exact.

Divinity? Really? Whatever...and the bible clearly states that all the non-believers in the bloke with the cool beard - Senor JC - are going to burn in hell when the 4 horsemen descend. That includes generous Jews, pious Muslims, Compassionate Buddhists - are to the barbeque with the fellow with the horns and tail...great story and total fear-based propaganda bullshit...

dagenham wrote:So what's the point, in the end? Apparently the entire bible is open to personal interpretation...Hmmm... and to get drunk excessively (apparently a sin) is the same degree as murdering 12 people and eating them. If there is "sin" (a big "if" for me as an agnostic) I can't believe they are all considered the "same degree".

I can accept that you believe there should be degrees of sin, and that being excessively drunk is different to murder. Our societal norms would agree with you wholeheartedly.

Plus, angels and sprites and ghosts and pixies didn't write the bible - men did - by committee to be exact.

Well, Council, if you want to be exact. The Council at Nicaea. What's your point, that God Himself is said to have physically written the book, and you've discovered it was penned by a committee?

Divinity? Really? Whatever...and the bible clearly states that all the non-believers in the bloke with the cool beard - Senor JC - are going to burn in hell when the 4 horsemen descend. That includes generous Jews, pious Muslims, Compassionate Buddhists - are to the barbeque with the fellow with the horns and tail...great story and total fear-based propaganda bullshit...

I truly wish I had a nice humanist response for you that would calm your flow, but I don't. You don't like the way the book is written, I get that.

StroppyChops wrote:

dagenham wrote:So what's the point, in the end? Apparently the entire bible is open to personal interpretation...Hmmm... and to get drunk excessively (apparently a sin) is the same degree as murdering 12 people and eating them. If there is "sin" (a big "if" for me as an agnostic) I can't believe they are all considered the "same degree".

I can accept that you believe there should be degrees of sin, and that being excessively drunk is different to murder. Our societal norms would agree with you wholeheartedly.

Plus, angels and sprites and ghosts and pixies didn't write the bible - men did - by committee to be exact.

Well, Council, if you want to be exact. The Council at Nicaea. What's your point, that God Himself is said to have physically written the book, and you've discovered it was penned by a committee?

Divinity? Really? Whatever...and the bible clearly states that all the non-believers in the bloke with the cool beard - Senor JC - are going to burn in hell when the 4 horsemen descend. That includes generous Jews, pious Muslims, Compassionate Buddhists - are to the barbeque with the fellow with the horns and tail...great story and total fear-based propaganda bullshit...

I truly wish I had a nice humanist response for you that would calm your flow, but I don't. You don't like the way the book is written, I get that.

Firstly, thanks for the thoughtful replies.

a) Society (throughout recorded history) and the Bible seem to be greatly out of synch there indeed re: drunkenness and cannibalism...and why exactly is that again?

b) How can the bible be considered the "scared" Word-of-God if penned by mere mortals who use the loo? Poetic parables and social politics at best...

c) No Humanistic spin can be put on the non-negotiable crystal-clear stance in the bible, written repeatedly, that non-believers in JC are destined for the fire heap due South of here. Period. Double Period. There aint no sugar-coating that core tenet of Christianity - it is absolutely intolerant of any other belief systems. Period. Double Period. There simply is no softening of that overt and mortal threat to scores of "good people" who don't happen to buy that singular inflexible menu on offer in the bible...whilst the heavens open for the sweet-souled believers, simultaneously the ground drops out for the hapless rest of the world - adios amigos.

Bollocks on that. Any religion that is centered on fear-mongering and violent threats is inherently insecure (obviously) - witness both Judaism and Buddhism which are absent of that feature. If you don't believe then you simply don't get the numerous benefits that those 2 religions offer. They don't threaten non-believers with some Lucifer character roasting you like a pig over a spit.

Big difference compared to Christianity. Big, very big.

I truly can't decide if you're looking for a genuine conversation on theology or just looking to 'win' something here and have me (as the current Christian before you) concede to your intellect. I wrote a fairly lengthy response to your post but as I was writing it I wondered at the value in that. It's in the spoiler below, if you're interested, but I imagine you're just looking for threads to pull rather than engaging. Otherwise, I'm happy to simply say I understand the points you make, and why you make them.

StroppyChops wrote:I truly can't decide if you're looking for a genuine conversation on theology or just looking to 'win' something here and have me (as the current Christian before you) concede to your intellect. I wrote a fairly lengthy response to your post but as I was writing it I wondered at the value in that. It's in the spoiler below, if you're interested, but I imagine you're just looking for threads to pull rather than engaging. Otherwise, I'm happy to simply say I understand the points you make, and why you make them.

Spoiler:

a) Sorry, I genuinely need you to reframe your question.

b) You're familiar with the Council, do you know it's story/history, or (genuine question) is "man wrote the Bible" enough for you?

c) Just out of interest, can you show me where in the Bible you find this Faustian hell or devil you're talking about?

Judaism and Christianity have the same roots, in fact they share the first five books of the Bible ("the Pentateuch ") and it might surprise you to know that Islam shares the same history of these books too. I noticed you left that particular religion out when you were discussing intolerant faiths. Most of the stuff that people say they don't like/agree with in the Bible comes from these shared scriptures, and you're kidding yourself if you think that Jews are less strict on these matters. I'll say nothing on the harshness of Muslim beliefs, that's a different discussion.

a) That comparison was just a specific example for illustrating the irrelevance of the statement that "there are no degrees of sin" in the bible as applied to accepted norms and values of modern society - where there are most decidedly different degrees of "sinning".

b) Yes, I understand the origins of the bible and the fact that is was written by man (men) negates the entire premise that it is "the word of god". If it is indeed straight from the lips of god then what mortal made that absolute judgement? The bible's true provenance is slippery and hazy from any angle.

c) I can't quote the exact verses as a bible is not handy right now. I am certain that they are there because I've read them and now you are ascertaining that, in fact, you don't need to believe in JC/God/Holy Ghost as the sole representation of the saviour in order to gain entrance into heaven and everlasting life? Really?

So anyone can go North when Jesus returns if they're a good person who has lived a righteous life? In your own customized version of Christianity is there even a 2nd coming/day of reckoning or is that an option you can choose? I don't understand what you're getting at...your particular Christian sect seems to have heavily edited the bible that I'm familiar with.

One thing I have found about non-believers who don't want to understand is that they are really quite good at it.

StroppyChops wrote:I truly can't decide if you're looking for a genuine conversation on theology or just looking to 'win' something here and have me (as the current Christian before you) concede to your intellect. I

b) You're familiar with the Council, do you know it's story/history, or (genuine question) is "man wrote the Bible" enough for you?

c) Just out of interest, can you show me where in the Bible you find this Faustian hell or devil you're talking about?

Judaism and Christianity have the same roots, in fact they share the first five books of the Bible ("the Pentateuch ") and it might surprise you to know that Islam shares the same history of these books too. I noticed you left that particular religion out when you were discussing intolerant faiths. Most of the stuff that people say they don't like/agree with in the Bible comes from these shared scriptures, and you're kidding yourself if you think that Jews are less strict on these matters. I'll say nothing on the harshness of Muslim beliefs, that's a different discussion.

Clever and articulate parry there...

a) It's impossible for intellect, rationality or scientific proof to even marginally effect a believer's faith. Period. Double Period. Convincing you of anything is entirely futile as "faith" will always be your trump card.

b) I'm well aware of the shared roots of Christianity and Judaism - there is no threat leveled at non-believers or Gentiles in the entire Jewish scriptures as there clearly is in the Christian bible. That is an undisputed fact amongst scholars and theologians. No real discussion there I'm afraid. Islam?

Well, no, I didn't include Islam because it is an entirely different animal from Judaism and Buddhism (who both do not arrogantly proselytize and cruelly desecrate native cultural practices out of the misguided goodness of their heartfelt "faith" - "faith" - that problematic word again - the self-righteous maniacal engine for all destructive religious actions)...it's intolerance and hunger for world domination make Islam every bit as sinister as Christianity. Of course, as we all know there have never been Christian missionaries actively trying to convert natives and destroy indigenous societies all over the globe throughout the history of the planet. Hmmm...

LTO wrote:One thing I have found about non-believers who don't want to understand is that they are really quite good at it.

One can "understand" but simply not believe. I think that I understand the basic principles of fascism, but I don't believe in them. I want to understand all belief systems and have studied most in detail and at length. I actively choose to disbelieve and distrust those that have the most flagrant and offensive threats toward any "others" - like Christianity and Islam for example.

The Jews and Buddhists and Animists? They don't want anyone else necessarily to join their program and don't hurl violent threats at the non-believers around them...plus you have to work hard just to be accepted into their gangs. I feel much more affinity and acceptance toward them than the criminal Missionary crews running amok (bad pun I know) here and everywhere else on the planet. Ban, tar, feather and deport them all I say!

dagenham wrote:a) That comparison was just a specific example for illustrating the irrelevance of the statement that "there are no degrees of sin" in the bible as applied to accepted norms and values of modern society - where there are most decidedly different degrees of "sinning".

Huh? Modern society judges actions as either lawful or not based on the legislation of the land on the day. Why do you equate breaking a societal law with the theological notion of sin? My original premise was that sin is a state of being rather than a verb, and that if this is so, there are no degrees of sin. I'm not sure how you pretzeled that into your above paragraph.

b) Yes, I understand the origins of the bible and the fact that is was written by man (men) negates the entire premise that it is "the word of god". If it is indeed straight from the lips of god then what mortal made that absolute judgement? The bible's true provenance is slippery and hazy from any angle.

It's never been a secret and it's never been hazy. Volumes have been written (secular and theological) about the provenance of the Bible - you raised the 'committee' and you restate here that "man wrote it so that proves it's not from God" - to me this just seems that you have a number of (atheistic, not agnostic) dot points you can list but don't actually know the underpinning theory. Not intended as an insult, by the way.

c) I can't quote the exact verses as a bible is not handy right now. I am certain that they are there because I've read them and now you are ascertaining that, in fact, you don't need to believe in JC/God/Holy Ghost as the sole representation of the saviour in order to gain entrance into heaven and everlasting life? Really?

Here's an online Bible for you: http://www.biblegateway.com
I'd still be fascinated to see these alleged scriptures about the hell and devil that you (and Faust) describe.

No, I'm not 'ascertaining' that, those are your words.

So anyone can go North when Jesus returns if they're a good person who has lived a righteous life? In your own customized version of Christianity is there even a 2nd coming/day of reckoning or is that an option you can choose? I don't understand what you're getting at...your particular Christian sect seems to have heavily edited the bible that I'm familiar with.

Again, your words, not mine. Not any of what you said in that paragraph can be attributed to me. Again, there's a link above to a Bible (and I promise the version you claim to know will be there), so please, enlighten me. I genuinely want to know.

LTO wrote:One thing I have found about non-believers who don't want to understand is that they are really quite good at it.

Ayup.