"Christian" Dogma in a Nutshell

Originally posted by Halitose
That’s exactly what a prodigal child would say about his/her parents. 😛

Anyways, I still disagree with ya. Mankind was created with divine intention; formed with the purpose of divine romance; fell into rebellion with God and is now stuck somewhere in between -- depending on their choices in life.

Yes. For all intents and purposes, God just couldn't get it right. But hey! Who's perfect, hu?

Originally posted by stocken
Yes. For all intents and purposes, God just couldn't get it right. But hey! Who's perfect, hu?

Actually it was man who rebelled. God made it possible by giving us the freedom of will to not choose Him; man in his rebellion made it a reality. Aren't you assuming that a perfect God must always create perfect beings? Free will inherently allows for evil.

Originally posted by Halitose
Actually it was man who rebelled. God made it possible by giving us the freedom of will to not choose Him; man in his rebellion made it a reality. Aren't you assuming that a perfect God must always create perfect beings? Free will inherently allows for evil.

Touché... 🙂

[edit: the "assuming a perfect God would create perfect beings"-part, that is.]

Originally posted by Halitose
That’s exactly what a prodigal child would say about his/her parents. 😛

Anyways, I still disagree with ya. Mankind was created with divine intention; formed with the purpose of divine romance; fell into rebellion with God and is now stuck somewhere in between -- depending on their choices in life.

My point: Who told the story of the prodigal son?

Originally posted by Halitose
Actually it was man who rebelled. God made it possible by giving us the freedom of will to not choose Him; man in his rebellion made it a reality. Aren't you assuming that a perfect God must always create perfect beings? Free will inherently allows for evil.

Free will inherently allows for evil.

I and others have refuted this over and over again. This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say that xians make excuses for their God. For an omnipotent, omniscient Creator, there can be no excuse.

Originally posted by telerion
[b]Free will inherently allows for evil.

I and others have refuted this over and over again. This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say that xians make excuses for their God. For an omnipotent, omniscient Creator, there can be no excuse.[/b]

Excuses are required where ignorance reigns.
Consider the crap that comes out of Stang's or No1's troubled minds. To gain attention, they deem it necessary to resort to hyperbole and exaggeration. Are the rants reasoned? Of course not. Is there any element of truth in the posts? Ever so slightly, as a lie cannot exist without some form of truth. Lies depend on the truth for survival.
The idea that God needs excuses for His actions speaks more to the misunderstanding of the one demanding them, than the need itself. Forget the fact that feeble Christian minds cannot answer queries from those better equipped, as this doesn't answer the question, either. If one wishes to understand the thinking of God, go to the Source.

I would like to join the fray if I may. We have free will because God is a God of love. Love demands free choice. Let's suppose you are married to some one who does not love you. You then try to force them to love you back. Is this love? No. How could it be different for God? He gives his creation the choice to love him back.

Originally posted by whodey
I would like to join the fray if I may. We have free will because God is a God of love. Love demands free choice. Let's suppose you are married to some one who does not love you. You then try to force them to love you back. Is this love? No. How could it be different for God? He gives his creation the choice to love him back.

Yes. If someone didn't love me back, I'd want them condemned to the flames of hell too.

Guess I'm just a good guy.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Excuses are required where ignorance reigns.
Consider the crap that comes out of Stang's or No1's troubled minds. To gain attention, they deem it necessary to resort to hyperbole and exaggeration. Are the rants reasoned? Of course not. Is there any element of truth in the posts? Ever so slightly, as a lie cannot exist without some form of truth. Lies ...[text shortened]... wer the question, either. If one wishes to understand the thinking of God, go to the Source.

Duh.

Actually, STANG or No1 hit the friggin nail right on the head sometimes.
As do we all, sometimes.
Go thump your Bible in a kindergarten class.
Oh wait, you can't do that, Praise Be, we kicked you out of the schools.

Originally posted by dottewell
Yes. If someone didn't love me back, I'd want them condemned to the flames of hell too.

Guess I'm just a good guy.

Let me ask you one thing. If you reject God, what are you rejecting? Is he not the source of all life. If you then reject the source of all life what are you choosing?

You see our perspective is skewed because of sin. Lets say that a man was on trial for murder. The man gets up and says that he is guilty of the crime but has not commited any other crimes in his entire life. He then tells the court what a good guy he is and what a good life he has led and really does not deserve the death penalty. The judge then corrects the man and tells him that he is not on trial for being good but rather for murder. You may have sympathy for the man because you are not personally involved. However, lets assume the man has murdered some one you love deeply. Then you would be calling for his head on a platter, would you not? Lets also assume the man's mother comes into the court room and begs the judge for leniency for the man because she loves him despite his guilt. Now you have two skewed perspectives as to what should happen to the man based on the same evidence because they are personally involved. Lets now say that you are at the end of your life and are guilty of only one sin which is lying. You probably don't think the sin of lying is such a big deal do you? This is because you are not holy but rather, you have a sin nature and you are accustomed to lying. If you were on trial for murder, however, you probably would think this was a big deal. Why? This is probably because you are not accustomed to commiting this sin. If, on the other hand, you were an assassin or a mass murder, you probably would not think murder was such a big deal. At any rate, God will be our ultimate judge. He does have a dilemma, however. On the one hand he is just and must judge sin justly and ,on the other hand, loves us and does not want to see us perish. What is he to do? What he did do was send Chirst to die for us. Christ is our lawyer and will exonerate us even though we are guilty. He has the loop hole in the law to get us off free of charge. Its like Johny Cockran getting up and saying "if it does not fit you must acquit." You may then ask how is this just? It can only be considered just if you turn from your sins which means turning to God. This is called repentence. Christ has paid the rest. Without his representation, however, we will all pay the ultimate price for being guilty.

Originally posted by whodey
Let me ask you one thing. If you reject God, what are you rejecting? Is he not the source of all life. If you then reject the source of all life what are you choosing?

You see our perspective is skewed because of sin. Lets say that a man was on trial for murder. The man gets up and says that he is guilty of the crime but has not commited any other cri . Without his representation, however, we will all pay the ultimate price for being guilty.

What exactly is this "repentence"? Is it just being sorry for my sins? Can I not repent without believing in God?

Do you commit less sins than I because you are saved?

Are you not saying that God will forgive us anything if we just believe in him?

How are people who do not believe in God because of a lack of evidence "turning away" from him? I am sure that if God revealed himself to them, clearly and personally, they would follow and obey. Why the impossible test?

Originally posted by dottewell
What exactly is this "repentence"?

Repentance is to stop sinning. Literally to "turn away" from it.

Is it just being sorry for my sins?

That combined with the action of stopping.

Can I not repent without believing in God?

No, because the point of repentance is to display to God that you know you've sinned against Him.

Do you commit less sins than I because you are saved?

Maybe. Maybe not. The point is that Christians' sins are covered by the blood of Christ. Yours ain't.

Are you not saying that God will forgive us anything if we just believe in him?

I hope not, as Satan "believes in God", but his sins ain't being forgiven anytime soon. The only faith that saves is trust in Christ's sin-washing blood.

How are people who do not believe in God because of a lack of evidence "turning away" from him?

Pffft. Lack of evidence. Good one. Skeptics can't find the evidence for the same reason a thief can't find a cop.

I am sure that if God revealed himself to them, clearly and personally, they would follow and obey.

Sure thing. If God appeared personally and in all His glory to a skeptic, said skeptic would stop sinning completely for all eternity and be completely content. Oh, and Darth Vader is real and lives in Jersey.

Why the impossible test?

What test do you speak of? This one:

How did the universe come into being? Choose A or B.

A) By nothing for no reason.
B) God.

Is that the test you mean?

If you think that's impossible, I have a feeling you never graced the honor roll.

Originally posted by telerion
Before God or not, there is a consistent message throughout the entire Bible that reviles mankind. There is nothing good in us. With the exception of demons, is any other creature punished eternally in the Bible?

What you bring up though actually reinforces this split nature in xianity. While acknowledging our detestable being, it also proclaims tha God's image. The intrinsic value rests solely in God. Everything else is up to his whim.

No - the Bible simply says that we are not perfect. That we do lie, cheat, steal and kill. You see the more extreme "all humans are scum" interpretation because it fits the demonised image you want to fit Christianity into.

I could never see it when I was a xian, but once I finally broke free it became so clear.

That's weird - it sounds just like the affirmation of a religious convert.

Originally posted by telerion
Free will inherently allows for evil.

I and others have refuted this over and over again. This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say that xians make excuses for their God. For an omnipotent, omniscient Creator, there can be no excuse.[/b]

I fail to see how you and others have refuted this "over and over again". Bbarr has argued that one can have "free will" and still always choose in just one manner - I just fail to see how that's free in any sense of the word.

Also, in the GAFE II thread I argued that the common definition of omnipotence and omniscience are self-contradictory.

Originally posted by no1marauder
What part? Which of the statements are incorrect?

1) Man is "evil" "depraved" etc etc etc by nature;

2) Man doesn't merit salvation but it is given to him as an act of grace IF;

3) He believes that Jesus Christ is his Savior and Lord.


Not surprising that no "Christian" wants to actually address the points.

What part? Which of the statements are incorrect?

1) Man is "evil" "depraved" etc etc etc by nature;

2) Man doesn't merit salvation but it is given to him as an act of grace IF;

3) He believes that Jesus Christ is his Savior and Lord.



None. Each is correct. But these are not a good "synopsis of "Christian" belief", but rather some of the logical inferences of Christianity.

A better synopsis of Christianity would be the "5 solas":
1) Sola Scriptura
2) Solus Christus
3) Sola Gratia
4) Sola Fide
5) Soli Deo Gloria


http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/topic/fivesolas.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_solas