Let me get this straight: Jesus died for our "Sins"? What sins are they?

I have nothing against God; one look at the stars a thousand miles from land and you can see the face of God. And she's beautiful out there in the deep black void.

My issues are with the human charlatans and shamans, more concerned with herding their flocks using lies for their own benefit than celebrating what a miracle it is to be us.

Every atom of our bodies was created billions of years ago in stars that no longer exist. We literally are the universe regarding itself.

I've written quite a lot on my blog to explain why I don't see "original sin" taught in scripture. There is no evidence in the text at all that either Adam or Eve was cursed directly with a "sin nature" or "sin gene". As I've explained in other threads here, Adam and Eve were sentient beings with the free will to either obey or disobey the command of God to not eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. They chose poorly. But what God had said would be the penalty was only death; that is, mortality. So what's with all the rest of what went wrong? I'm greatly oversimplifying here, but Adam added to his sin by blaming God Himself for it ("that woman you gave me"). This was direct, willful rebellion by a being who fully understood what he was doing. That is the root of all the corruption, evil, and suffering in the world.

But the point is that Adam was not made with any "sin nature" and lived in an environment where everything was "very good", so what made him sin? If we can't blame Adam's nature for sin, then by what right does anyone blame "nature" for our sin? More importantly, if people could sin in a pristine environment, it should come as no surprise that people sin in a corrupt, evil world. We sin when we willfully rebel against the will of God. No matter how good or right it seems to us, if God said don't do it, it's sin. Clearly, babies cannot willfully rebel against God, and there is even an explicit passage of scripture (Ezekiel 18) that says children do not share the guilt of their parents. And if not their own parents, how much less their ultimate and distant "parents" Adam and Eve?

To add to that post above; tell me again what sins I have committed that I should feel gratitude to Jesus for erasing? What kind of psycho would let their child take the rap and the punishment, when they themselves are the root cause and at fault? How is that supposed to make me feel grateful to a crazy God?

From what I explained, it should be clear that since those who have rejected Jesus are in violation of the will of God, they have sinned. And we can also see that Adam and Eve were not children in the sense of being unaware of the will of God, so the analogy is inaccurate--- and so is the grievance against God, being based upon a very poor grasp of the scriptures. Granted, most Christians don't think about these things either, but that isn't God's fault. And he's undoubtedly laughing at these puny humans who shake their little fists at him and set themselves up as his judges, when they don't have a clue what they're talking about.

reply to post by SaberTruth


So you would worship a God who would cherry-pick a scenario where his / her creations could not possibly win? And that would provide some excuse for that God to penalize them?

That is no God I would worship; and NOT the God that created me.

All the writings in the world does not make valid that view of God; waiting for the lightning bolts, oh so sorry - that is the provence of my God's father, not your impotent and childishly cruel God.

Mine has proved real in the power of steel and the virtues to protect the helpless. Your son of God was nailed up upon a cross; My God's son carried a hammer, and struck down those who would pretend to be the voices of God.

reply to post by mydarkpassenger


According to the Bible, the only time someone can get baptized is when they are age 20 and older. That is the age God considers you guilty for sin. You may check the old testament if you like to confirm what i'm saying. The Catholic church baptizes babies have no idea what they are doing. All they are doing is washing those babies clean.

When you get baptized properly, in Jesus Christ name, age 20 and upward, all your past sins are forgiven. Not all sins you will ever commit. That is the doctrine that Christianity is teaching! That's wickedness. But once you get baptized in Jesus Christ name, like Paul said in Romans 6:1-4, and Romans 6:15-16, you have to walk in newness of life. That means keeping the laws, statutes, commandments, holy days, and the faith in Jesus. You must have faith, AND works to get into the kingdom. The Christian church is teaching you can do whatever you want, as long as you confess the Lord as your savior with your mouth. But that is NOT what the scriptures say.

Revelation 14:12

King James Version (KJV)

12Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Originally posted by HolyandClean
reply to post by mydarkpassenger

 

According to the Bible, the only time someone can get baptized is when they are age 20 and older. That is the age God considers you guilty for sin. You may check the old testament if you like to confirm what i'm saying. The Catholic church baptizes babies have no idea what they are doing. All they are doing is washing those babies clean.

When you get baptized properly, in Jesus Christ name, age 20 and upward, all your past sins are forgiven. Not all sins you will ever commit. That is the doctrine that Christianity is teaching! That's wickedness. But once you get baptized in Jesus Christ name, like Paul said in Romans 6:1-4, and Romans 6:15-16, you have to walk in newness of life. That means keeping the laws, statutes, commandments, holy days, and the faith in Jesus. You must have faith, AND works to get into the kingdom. The Christian church is teaching you can do whatever you want, as long as you confess the Lord as your savior with your mouth. But that is NOT what the scriptures say.

Revelation 14:12

King James Version (KJV)

12Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Ask a catholic. A child without baptism and communion is doomed.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by mydarkpassenger
Every religious christian post seems to presuppose that we are born with certain black marks against us called "sins"; how is that supposed to happen? How is a newborn baby a sinner who will go to hell if it dies a moment or two before some idiot can splash water on it and mumble a few mis-pronounced latin phrases?

Wow, so many straw men burning at once!!

1. Newborns don't go to hell.
2. Baptism doesn't save anyone, nor is it necessary for salvation. (See: Thief on the cross)
3. Latin phrases don't save anyone.

If you want a list of laws to keep to justify yourself to God there are 613 listed in Exodus and Leviticus. If you can keep them all up till your death you'll be able to walk up to the throne in heaven and say "Move over, now there are two of us."

I'd really suggest "plan B" though, it's free and takes a few seconds of prayer on your knees.

Baptism is required for salvation. (Acts 2:38, Mark 16:16)

Surely you know the requirements for salvation as a staunch believer. Second, Moses said the Laws were easy to keep. Is he a liar?

Originally posted by mydarkpassenger
reply to post by SaberTruth

 

So you would worship a God who would cherry-pick a scenario where his / her creations could not possibly win? And that would provide some excuse for that God to penalize them?

That is no God I would worship; and NOT the God that created me.

Who says God picked any such scenario? It wasn't God who made Adam and Eve sin, and it wasn't God who made Eve leave the garden and follow Adam. Had Eve chosen to stay, she would in all likelihood have been the one to give (virgin) birth to the Savior and that would have been the end of it.

But evidently "the God that created you" isn't faring well either. People like to ignore the effect of sin on the world so they can blame everything on God, but then they invent a god of their own yet never charge that god with wrongdoing. Makes no sense to me.

Mine has proved real in the power of steel and the virtues to protect the helpless. Your son of God was nailed up upon a cross; My God's son carried a hammer, and struck down those who would pretend to be the voices of God.

Insult God all you like if it makes you feel better. Ignore the fault of your own god(s) as well, if it makes you feel "holier than thou". But the fact remains that Jesus rose from the dead and I'm following him.

reply to post by SaberTruth


You wrote:

["It wasn't God who made Adam and Eve sin, and it wasn't God who made Eve leave the garden and follow Adam."]

But the idea of this thread is to establish 'sin' per se. Now you introduce common christian circle-argumentation and operate from 'sin' as an absolute.

There was no 'sin' at all, just the demon-lord Jahveh (be he a real demon or fictive) orchestrating a scenario, which would justify his sociopathic ambitions.

reply to post by SaberTruth


You say you are following God.. let me ask you.. Do you keep the laws, statutes, commandments, holy days and the faith in Jesus? Cause if not, you are following Satan.

reply to post by bogomil

. . .Jahveh (be he a real demon or fictive) orchestrating a scenario,. . .

There is an alternative way of interpreting the scenerio, which is that God did not plant that certain tree. It does not say He did, it says God planted a garden, and in the midst of it was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. It does not say he put it there, just that it was there, just like it does not explain where the serpent came from or why it was able to speak like a human. A possible reason for the omission could be that the scribe was trying to be respectful to the one who was given the same name as their national god. It may have been considered rude to point out that their god was not able to stop the serpent from putting that tree there, or to be able to keep the serpent out. God said that eventually a man will come along who would kill the serpent. Then in the Book of Hebrews, the writer says that Jesus came for the purpose of killing Satan. So, why could God not have just killed Satan, out right, a long time ago? There was some sort of mystery here that the scribes had no answer for, and so the ambiguity. Well we know, now, that Jesus had to die, himself, first. It could be that it was necessary to keep it rather secret, until after the fact, for the events to play out, to where it became obvious of how evil Satan was, and how killing him would be a righteous act.