[Pseudonym]

Dayseed Dayseed:

No, truth is not exclusive at all. The law of gravity is true to everyone, everything and everywhere. Who the hell is it exclusive to? Only people who believe in it? If that's the case, I invite all gravitational disbelievers to test the strength of their belief that truth is exclusive and find a nice tall building from whence to leap.

If you float, you can gloat.

"Truth is exclusive" does not imply that truth applies only in specific circumstances. That would be dumb. By that statement I was indicating that if the Christian worldview is true, then all others that contradict it must be false. I was simply rephrasing a basic law of logic.

[Pseudonym]

Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:

What kind of sacrifice is an eternal, omnipotent being playing dressup as a mortal, getting his costume kicked around for a bit, and then going back to Heaven? There's no sacrifice - God could pop back down dressed up as his "only mortal daughter" Janine and do it all over again, suffering precisely no actual consequences whatsoever.

Even if we ignore that and pretend he did some great service to mankind in doing so, what on earth is rational about doing it by "killing" himself? Since he's obviously making this stuff up for himself, he could have easily popped down and said, "from now on, goats will all walk backwards and that's a sign to you that I will pardon your sins as long as you care for at least one goat and make sure they don't bump into things" and it makes as much sense. At least we'd have the evidence of the backwards-walking goats - right now we have no real evidence that God sacrificed himself and not a regular person.

Crucifixion is not the sort of thing to be downplayed in terms of sacrifice. If God took on the full nature of man then it certainly wasn't a simple matter of "getting his costume kicked around for a bit". However, the suffering, while an important part of the story, is not the main point.

A perfect God, by His very nature, cannot coexist with evil according to principles of justice. There must be payment of some sort, and that payment could only be satified with the imputed righteousness of a perfect, sinless man.

[Blue_Nose]

Pseudonym Pseudonym:

Crucifixion is not the sort of thing to be downplayed in terms of sacrifice.

As far as an omnipotent, eternal being in concerned, it's not just a minor sacrifice- there was no sacrifice, period.

If you disagree, explain what was sacrificed; sacrifice implies losing something of value, and God's infinitely capable of coming to Earth as Jesus again this very second, or a billion times more if he chose to.

Pseudonym Pseudonym:

A perfect God, by His very nature, cannot coexist with evil according to principles of justice. There must be payment of some sort, and that payment could only be satified with the imputed righteousness of a perfect, sinless man.

You've yet to demonstrate any of that, and you're the one that made the statement that it made sense - payment to whom, and necessarily in that form according to whom?

[romanP]

How can one accept that an imaginary being is anything but imaginary?

[Pseudonym]

Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:

Pseudonym Pseudonym:

Crucifixion is not the sort of thing to be downplayed in terms of sacrifice.

As far as an omnipotent, eternal being in concerned, it's not just a minor sacrifice- there was no sacrifice, period.

If you disagree, explain what was sacrificed; sacrifice implies losing something of value, and God's infinitely capable of coming to Earth as Jesus again this very second, or a billion times more if he chose to.

Then by his very nature God is incapable of sacrifice in those terms. What term would you like me to use instead to describe the suffering of extreme pain and humiliation on the behalf of those who have despised you?

Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:

Pseudonym Pseudonym:

A perfect God, by His very nature, cannot coexist with evil according to principles of justice. There must be payment of some sort, and that payment could only be satified with the imputed righteousness of a perfect, sinless man.

You've yet to demonstrate any of that, and you're the one that made the statement that it made sense - payment to whom, and necessarily in that form according to whom?

God is paying God according to God. We have a theoretical infinite being here. He sets the standards by his very nature. Good is defined by what is in accordance with his will, evil by what is not. To have it otherwise would imply an higher authority than God.

[Blue_Nose]

Pseudonym Pseudonym:

What term would you like me to use instead to describe the suffering of extreme pain and humiliation on the behalf of those who have despised you?

You're speaking in terms of a human experiencing those events, and I've already explained why that's irrelevant to an eternal, omnipotent God - you made the claim that payment for sins by God was required by God through his sacrifice, and there's been no sacrifice. What exactly was the value of the payment then?

Pseudonym Pseudonym:

God is paying God according to God. We have a theoretical infinite being here. He sets the standards by his very nature. Good is defined by what is in accordance with his will, evil by what is not. To have it otherwise would imply an higher authority than God.

So there's really no logical reason for him to need pay himself. He's not bound by any authority but his own.

Let's say you owe me some money and you were supposed to transfer some money to my bank account. Now, I want to cancel that debt because I'm merciful and I see that you can't afford it. Would it make ANY sense whatsoever for me to create another bank account for myself at your bank, deposit some of my own money in that account, and then transfer that money from my new bank account to my original one, and then tell you that I didn't want to just forgive the debt and therefore you should appreciate all the extra work I put myself through?

You claimed this was all reasonable and logical, and I've yet to see anything remotely reasonable or logical about any of it.

[romanP]

Pseudonym Pseudonym:

God is paying God according to God. We have a theoretical infinite being here. He sets the standards by his very nature. Good is defined by what is in accordance with his will, evil by what is not. To have it otherwise would imply an higher authority than God.

Or no authority.

[romanP]

Religious beliefs are rarely reasonable or logical.

[Tricks]

Mustang1 Mustang1:

If Christianity is allegedly "universal" and addresses "all" questions, then why did it take so long to be "introduced" to mankind? Why hasn't it been here from the beginning and been present in all cultures in all historical epochs? Seems pretty suspicious that it "evolves" from a "start" point that's roughly thousands of years into man's cognitive awakening.

Well probably because they have just taken ideas from faith of ancient times and adopted it into their own.

[fifeboy]

Tricks Tricks:

Well probably because they have just taken ideas from faith of ancient times and adopted it into their own.

[poquas]

From the mouth of someone I considered a joke initially; Jesse Ventura (former Minnesota Governor) stated in a 1999 interview;

$1:

"Organized religion is a sham and a crutch for weak-minded people who need strength in numbers. It tells people to go out and stick their noses in other people's business."

I’ve yet to hear a more concise, logical basic truth about religion. Even in subsequent interviews where he softens his views somewhat, he does a terrific job of laying it out that makes this such a memorable quote.

[romanP]

Professional wrestlers often manage to have that strange stupid/smart duality about them. Like they know they're a walking joke, but sometimes they just have to break character and speak the truth.

[Dayseed]

Pseudonym Pseudonym:

A perfect God, by His very nature, cannot coexist with evil according to principles of justice. There must be payment of some sort, and that payment could only be satified with the imputed righteousness of a perfect, sinless man.

That's just about the biggest piece of non-sensical mush I've ever read. Define these "principles of justice". Why can't a perfect God co-exist with evil? Why must there be "payment"? Didn't God make up all the rules in the universe? Is he subject to rules outside his control?

Pseudonym, cut the crap. You pulled all of that out of your ass with zero foresight. It's meaningless.

And it's still flawed! How is Jesus Christ a symbol of perfection? He smote a fig tree because it wouldn't produce dates out of season. This represents which part of perfection? He's mad at the tree and blights it with a word...that's wrath! Also, Power Word: Kill for you Dragonlance types. Shit, it's in direct defiance of Proverbs that said hands that shed blood are one of the six things the Lord hateth!

Is Jesus a self-loather?

[Dayseed]

Blue_Nose Blue_Nose:

Since he's obviously making this stuff up for himself, he could have easily popped down and said, "from now on, goats will all walk backwards and that's a sign to you that I will pardon your sins as long as you care for at least one goat and make sure they don't bump into things" and it makes as much sense. At least we'd have the evidence of the backwards-walking goats - right now we have no real evidence that God sacrificed himself and not a regular person.

In Alberta, if you see a backwards-walking cow, you shoot that Mad Cow and bury its corpse without telling a soul so beef exports can continue.

[Tricks]

fifeboy fifeboy:

Tricks Tricks:

Well probably because they have just taken ideas from faith of ancient times and adopted it into their own.

Ok?