Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Spirituality

Spirituality

  1. Subscriber FMF
    Main Poster
    22 Aug '18 00:00
    Most of the Christians here appear to believe that they are rewarded with eternal life NOT because they live their lives - inspired by Jesus - trying not to be "evil and wicked", but instead they are rewarded with eternal life because they believe they are forgiven - by Jesus, and because of his death - for being "evil and wicked".

    Do any Christians dissent from this encapsulation?
  2. 22 Aug '18 00:06
    Originally posted by @fmf
    Most of the Christians here appear to believe that they are rewarded with eternal life NOT because they live their lives - inspired by Jesus - trying not to be "evil and wicked", but instead they are rewarded with eternal life because they believe they are forgiven - by Jesus, and because of his death - for being "evil and wicked".

    Do any Christians dissent from this encapsulation?
    According to the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry, eternal life is about actually becoming righteous. Not merely "trying" to be righteous.
  3. Subscriber FMF
    Main Poster
    22 Aug '18 00:09
    Originally posted by @thinkofone
    According to the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry, eternal life is about actually becoming righteous. Not merely "trying" to be righteous.
    OK, but the angle I am interested in is the ideology of attaining eternal life through believing that one's "evil and wickedness" is forgiven [a.k.a. "Grace"] rather than through overcoming "evil and wickedness".
  4. 22 Aug '18 00:11
    Originally posted by @fmf
    Most of the Christians here appear to believe that they are rewarded with eternal life NOT because they live their lives - inspired by Jesus - trying not to be "evil and wicked", but instead they are rewarded with eternal life because they believe they are forgiven - by Jesus, and because of his death - for being "evil and wicked".

    Do any Christians dissent from this encapsulation?
    I've never really liked the description given to ALL humans as evil, wicked and a sinner....all seemingly because of the decisions made by Adam and Eve.

    Even an infant is said to be a soon to be sinner.

    Most Christians seem to walk around with baggage on their shoulders of "no good", sinner, and whose attempts at anything good are like "filthy rags" anyway.

    The label bothers me.
  5. 22 Aug '18 00:19
    Originally posted by @fmf
    OK, but the angle I am interested in is the ideology of attaining eternal life through believing that one's "evil and wickedness" is forgiven [a.k.a. "Grace"] rather than through overcoming "evil and wickedness".
    As worded your OP indicates "trying" rather than actually "overcoming 'evil and wickedness'". It's a very important distinction.
  6. Subscriber FMF
    Main Poster
    22 Aug '18 00:20
    Originally posted by @chaney3
    I've never really liked the description given to ALL humans as evil, wicked and a sinner....all seemingly because of the decisions made by Adam and Eve.

    Even an infant is said to be a soon to be sinner.

    Most Christians seem to walk around with baggage on their shoulders of "no good", sinner, and whose attempts at anything good are like "filthy rags" anyway.

    The label bothers me.
    It's a psychological gimmick.

    The profoundly misanthropic ideology of a lot of self-styled Christians ~ albeit generally not the ones I live and work among who are people walking the walk rather than thinking the think ~ seems to involve pissing on everybody's back, telling them it's raining, and then offering a kind of imaginary 'Emperor's New Clothes' umbrella. .
  7. 22 Aug '18 00:23 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by @chaney3
    I've never really liked the description given to ALL humans as evil, wicked and a sinner....all seemingly because of the decisions made by Adam and Eve.

    Even an infant is said to be a soon to be sinner.

    Most Christians seem to walk around with baggage on their shoulders of "no good", sinner, and whose attempts at anything good are like "filthy rags" anyway.

    The label bothers me.
    That theology is an incoherent mess. From what I can tell, it was devised in an attempt to explain the necessity of Jesus' "atoning sacrifice".
  8. Subscriber FMF
    Main Poster
    22 Aug '18 00:24
    Originally posted by @thinkofone
    As worded your OP indicates "trying" rather than actually "overcoming 'evil and wickedness'". It's a very important distinction.
    While I see the relevance, I personally am not interested in the distinction you wish to discuss with people. What I am interested in, though, is the notion of "Grace" - the idea that "forgiveness" renders "evil and wickedness" 'not the issue' ~ instead the issue is 'belief'. My previous comment about the imaginary umbrella illustrates the angle I am interested in.
  9. 22 Aug '18 00:29
    Originally posted by @fmf
    While I see the relevance, I personally am not interested in the distinction you wish to discuss with people. What I am interested in, though, is the notion of "Grace" - the idea that "forgiveness" renders "evil and wickedness" 'not the issue' ~ instead the issue is 'belief'. My previous comment about the imaginary umbrella illustrates the angle I am interested in.
    You seem to have missed the point again. That said, you'd have been better off leaving the other side of it out of your OP altogether.
  10. 22 Aug '18 00:30
    Originally posted by @thinkofone
    That theology is an incoherent mess. From what I can tell, it was devised in an attempt to explain the necessity of Jesus' "atoning sacrifice".
    I agree, because it puts us all in a revolving catch 22 dilemma:

    We are "no good", so we try to "do good", which is "never good enough".

    This line of thinking is terrible for self esteem and self worth.
  11. Subscriber FMF
    Main Poster
    22 Aug '18 00:32
    Originally posted by @thinkofone
    You seem to have missed the point again. That said, you'd have been better off leaving the other side of it out of your OP altogether.
    I am not interested in the distinction you seek to make between overcoming "evil and wickedness" and trying to overcome "evil and wickedness". Maybe someone will use this thread as an opportunity to engage you on that distinction but it's not going to be me. The OP is fine as it is.
  12. 22 Aug '18 00:35
    Originally posted by @fmf
    It's a psychological gimmick.

    The profoundly misanthropic ideology of a lot of self-styled Christians ~ albeit generally not the ones I live and work among who are people walking the walk rather than thinking the think ~ seems to involve pissing on everybody's back, telling them it's raining, and then offering a kind of imaginary 'Emperor's New Clothes' umbrella. .
    I don't understand your illustration.
  13. 22 Aug '18 00:38
    Originally posted by @chaney3
    I agree, because it puts us all in a revolving catch 22 dilemma:

    We are "no good", so we try to "do good", which is "never good enough".

    This line of thinking is terrible for self esteem and self worth.
    It's even worse than that. They don't believe it possible, so they of course they'll never get to where Jesus and God said they need to be.They cause themselves and others to "stumble".


    Also, in their attempts to prop up their nonsensical theology, many deem themselves "righteous" even though they are not.
  14. Subscriber FMF
    Main Poster
    22 Aug '18 00:38
    Originally posted by @chaney3
    I don't understand your illustration.
    OK. I think it's pretty clear. It comes from the saying: 'Don't piss on my back and tell me it's raining" the meaning of which is no mystery.
  15. 22 Aug '18 00:39
    Originally posted by @fmf
    I am not interested in the distinction you seek to make between overcoming "evil and wickedness" and trying to overcome "evil and wickedness". Maybe someone will use this thread as an opportunity to engage you on that distinction but it's not going to be me. The OP is fine as it is.
    And you've missed the point again.