God and Sin

[Clizby WampusCat]

God did not require a sacrifice.

Paul says in 1 Cor 15:17 that if gods was not raised, then we would still be in our sins. Romans 5:9 says the blood of Jesus saves us. How can these things happen if god was not sacrificed? If there was another way to forgive sin why was Jesus sacrificed, he said no one killed him, he chose to be killed.

 

[theoneandonlypencil]

Show me where I said this please.

Have you ever wondered why God asks you to forgive others without a sacrifice but is unwilling to do that himself?

God doesn't need to keep making individual sacrifices. He made one ultimate sacrifice that extends to everyone in all ages.

This would be hard to show with the biblical texts.

Not when you understand that the original words uses in the texts to describe the flood didn't necessarily include 'the entire world'.

Wow, you think babies deserved to be drowned?

I never said that. Perhaps try replying to what I actually said instead of building your entire argument on extremes.

Tell me where in the Bible it states that babies go right to heaven. Also, even if they do, you still think it is OK to drown them and make them suffer that death? Could God have figured out a way to fix the situation without killing almost everyone? If so, then he made the choice to kill them. If not, then maybe he is not as powerful or good as you think he is.

God also has consistently warned people from the very beginning what happens when you go as far as they did. What kind of person are you to choose debauchery and chaos over the life of your own child?

Show me in the Bible where it says children go to hell. Then explain to me how children go to hell, when Jesus said we 'must be like little children' to enter heaven.

You made an error here by assuming that I am pro choice. I am not, I am pro life. I think abortion is an immoral act.

Good. Very rarely do I meet atheists who are pro-life.

And I strongly disagree with what he defines as right and wrong based on empathy, evidence and reason. Show me that the god of the bible exists and I will still have to conclude that he has acted immorally in the past.

1. Empathy is not a decider in truths.

2. There is no empirical evidence to define morality other than man-made moral truths and whatever social habits we developed to thrive as a species. Defining evidence itself is a problem in debating what counts as as true or false because evidence itself needs to be asserted as true to remain evidence.

3. Reason and logic follow the same issues as point no.2

Your view on God and morality is purely subjective and shaped by nobody but yourself and the culture you live in.

 

[hedrick]

This is poetic language, not literal:

Ps 51:5 Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.

Ps 22:31 His righteous acts will be told to those not yet born. They will hear about everything he has done.

Ps 58:3 Even from birth the wicked go astray; from the womb they are wayward and speak lies.

Psalm 8:2 Through the praise of children and infants you have established a stronghold against your enemies, to silence the foe and the avenger.

Ps 96:12 Let the field be joyful, and all that is in it. Then all the trees of the woods will rejoice

.

I would agree. Ps 51 is surely emphasizing the author's consciousness of unworthiness. If you're going to take it literally, you might look at vs 16, which says God doesn't want sacrifice, but only repentance.

The problem with saying no people are righteous is that both OT and NT describe several people that way. Rom 3:10 says no one is righteous, but the context is obviously referring to a righteousness that would merit God's love. That's not what the word normally means. It means living as a faithful follower, which isn't perfection, but does include repenting when you sin. And in fact Paul agrees that God accepts faith as righteousness. He doesn't, despite many vocal assertions, claim that righteousness is moral perfection imputed to us from Christ's perfection.

My biggest problem with conservative exegesis isn't that it claims inerrancy, but that it latches onto a couple of unusual passages and uses them to overrule the more usual teaching of Scripture. This is only one of many examples.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

I quoted verses from the Psalms that are clearly allegorical. Psalms are poetry, songs.

How do you know this? Saying they are clearly allegorical is not a justification. Other Christians say differently.

Pray that God shows you the truth.

Can you show me the truth?

My mistake.

No problem.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

God doesn't need to keep making individual sacrifices. He made one ultimate sacrifice that extends to everyone in all ages.

I agree this is what the bible teaches.

Not when you understand that the original words uses in the texts to describe the flood didn't necessarily include 'the entire world'.

So I need to know Hebrew to understand the bible correctly?

I never said that. Perhaps try replying to what I actually said instead of building your entire argument on extremes.

Do you believe God was justified in drowning babies?

God also has consistently warned people from the very beginning what happens when you go as far as they did.

How did he worn people?

What kind of person are you to choose debauchery and chaos over the life of your own child?

Could god have fixed this situation a different way? You avoided the question.

Show me in the Bible where it says children go to hell. Then explain to me how children go to hell, when Jesus said we 'must be like little children' to enter heaven.

I am not claiming the bible says that they do. I am claiming that the bible says that god drowned babies. Even if they do go to heaven it is still a terrible way to die and terrifying for the parents.

Good. Very rarely do I meet atheists who are pro-life.

I understand.

1. Empathy is not a decider in truths.

Never said it was. It does help me decide morals.

2. There is no empirical evidence to define morality other than man-made moral truths and whatever social habits we developed to thrive as a species. Defining evidence itself is a problem in debating what counts as as true or false because evidence itself needs to be asserted as true to remain evidence.

Not asserted but demonstrated to be true to be convincing evidence.

3. Reason and logic follow the same issues as point no.2

Without any reason to believe there are absolute morals reason and logic go a long way to determine what morals we should have.

Your view on God and morality is purely subjective and shaped by nobody but yourself and the culture you live in.

My goal for morality is subjective but once I have a goal I can have a system of objective morality.

 

[Andrewn]

Can you show me the truth?

I try to point at the road to take. But I cannot bring the destination to you or even to myself. Jesus said that He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

Paul says in 1 Cor 15:17 that if gods was not raised, then we would still be in our sins. Romans 5:9 says the blood of Jesus saves us. How can these things happen if god was not sacrificed? If there was another way to forgive sin why was Jesus sacrificed, he said no one killed him, he chose to be killed.

You know the Bible well. NT Wright explains God's loving sacrifice better than me in this 15-minute video. If you take the time to watch it, plz get back to me with any observations or comments.

 

[hedrick]

Paul says in 1 Cor 15:17 that if gods was not raised, then we would still be in our sins. Romans 5:9 says the blood of Jesus saves us. How can these things happen if god was not sacrificed? If there was another way to forgive sin why was Jesus sacrificed, he said no one killed him, he chose to be killed.

I believe for Paul, the point is that we are connected with Christ, and through his death and resurrection enter new life. The problem isn't forgiveness. God can forgive freely, and did so before Christ. But without Christ, even forgiven, we are still in our sins. What Christ brings us is new life, which will end with eternal new life. It is because we are in Christ that we are justified, and will (as Wright explains in the clip above) eventually be saved.

Jesus himself spoke of his death as bringing the new covenant, using language from Exodus that implies it is a covenant sacrifice. Since the new covenant writes God's law into our hearts, this is another way of speaking of the same thing as Paul.

Calvin says it is primarily Jesus' obedience that transforms us, because we are united with him in a "community of righteousness." The cross is the result of someone obedient to the death in a world that can't stand perfect holiness.

 

[ChetSinger]

So babies are sinful but because they don't choose it they are off the hook?

No. Sin implies guilt, and babies are guilty of nothing. What they inherit from their parents is a nature that is guaranteed to eventually sin.

When does this stop being the case?

Ah, it sounds as if you're asking about the "age of accountability". Did the church you attended have one? The New Testament has none, afaik, and my church has none.

 

[miknik5]

I asked this question in another thread that was recently closed. I am confused when people say that God cannot be in the presence of sin. I have heard this said many times for a reason why we need our sin removed before we can be with God. I even said this when I was a christian. My confusion is that the bible does not seem to support this assertion. There are many examples of God being in the presence of people or sinful beings. Here are some:

Genesis 3 has God in the garden with Adam and Eve after they sinned.
The story of Job tells about Satan and God having a conversion in the presence of each other. God showed His backside to Moses.
Isaiah chapter 6 tells of being in the presence of God.
See also 2 Chron 18.
Jer 23 says God is everywhere and in the presence of sinful people.
The Damascus experience of Paul where Jesus shows up.
And then there is Jesus as fully God in the presence of sinners 24/7 for his entire life.

I never questioned this as a Christian. If you believe this how do you reconcile these verses? If not, then why do we need Jesus to be with God?

Yes it does...look at Moses and how his face was transformed and how he had to wear a veil in the presence of the people lest they stare full on at the GLORY of the PRESENCE of GOD...and look at the HOLY of HOLIES and its construct that in between the HOLY of HOLIES and men, was a veil...

And then look at Haggai 2 and remember that I have been telling you all along that the word of GOD is a prophecy and testimony of JESUS....

 

[miknik5]

By the way, Clizby...on your other thread...post 1725 if I remember correctly, who gave you the evidence that the earth was spherical? And when? And where did you get this information that led you to make the choice to believe the earth was spherical?

 

[eleos1954]

Where is sarcasm in my response? No really I want to know.

Maybe instead of accusing me of things you cannot possibly know, just answer the question.

I'm not accusing you of nothing .... what I stated goes for believers as well ... I've been there and done that ..... wallowed around in ignorance ... now I study daily and with sincerity.[/QUOTE]

ok ... so perhaps I was being assumptive ... sorry about that

however ... before continuing and responding to your questions .... I need to know something .... this is to avoid being assumptive

Being a self-described atheist ... What is your intent in participating in a christian forum?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

By the way, Clizby...on your other thread...post 1725 if I remember correctly, who gave you the evidence that the earth was spherical? And when? And where did you get this information that led you to make the choice to believe the earth was spherical?

My belief that the earth is spherical is not a choice. I am convinced by the evidence, I cannot believe otherwise based on the evidence I have seen.

I believe the pictures are real. People have done numerous repeatable experiments that have converged on this conclusion. I was in the navy, the only way the navigation maps make sense is with a spherical earth. The pictures should be enough.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

I'm not accusing you of nothing .... what I stated goes for believers as well ... I've been there and done that ..... wallowed around in ignorance ... now I study daily and with sincerity.

ok ... so perhaps I was being assumptive ... sorry about that

however ... before continuing and responding to your questions .... I need to know something .... this is to avoid being assumptive

Being a self-described atheist ... What is your intent in participating in a christian forum?[/QUOTE]Christians claim to know truth. I want to know what is true. I want to study the claims and see if they convince me.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

I try to point at the road to take. But I cannot bring the destination to you or even to myself. Jesus said that He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

Then I will wait for Jesus to show me I guess.

You know the Bible well. NT Wright explains God's loving sacrifice better than me in this 15-minute video. If you take the time to watch it, plz get back to me with any observations or comments.

NT Wright is famously ambiguous about what he says just like Brian McLaren. Why should I believe his interpretation over John MacArthur's or Charles Spurgeon's for example?

What did Jesus sacrifice exactly?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

No. Sin implies guilt, and babies are guilty of nothing. What they inherit from their parents is a nature that is guaranteed to eventually sin.

That is not what the words say. But thanks for your interpretation.

Ah, it sounds as if you're asking about the "age of accountability". Did the church you attended have one? The New Testament has none, afaik, and my church has none.

If you believe as you said above that babies will eventually bear guilt of sin, how do you know at what point they will bear the guilt of their sin?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

I believe for Paul, the point is that we are connected with Christ, and through his death and resurrection enter new life. The problem isn't forgiveness. God can forgive freely, and did so before Christ. But without Christ, even forgiven, we are still in our sins. What Christ brings us is new life, which will end with eternal new life. It is because we are in Christ that we are justified, and will (as Wright explains in the clip above) eventually be saved.

How are we "in" Christ? Can god forgive us without the death and resurrection of Jesus?

Jesus himself spoke of his death as bringing the new covenant, using language from Exodus that implies it is a covenant sacrifice. Since the new covenant writes God's law into our hearts, this is another way of speaking of the same thing as Paul.

Why is your interpretation correct and other Christians using the same bible incorrect?

Calvin says it is primarily Jesus' obedience that transforms us, because we are united with him in a "community of righteousness." The cross is the result of someone obedient to the death in a world that can't stand perfect holiness.

What does this even mean?

 

[miknik5]

My belief that the earth is spherical is not a choice. I am convinced by the evidence, I cannot believe otherwise based on the evidence I have seen.

I believe the pictures are real. People have done numerous repeatable experiments that have converged on this conclusion. I was in the navy, the only way the navigation maps make sense is with a spherical earth. The pictures should be enough.

But you were not a first hand witness to this. You had those before you who had discovered this and had given their words and evidence to believe this...

And we believe based on their words and evidence.

 

[Andrewn]

Then I will wait for Jesus to show me I guess.

NT Wright is famously ambiguous about what he says just like Brian McLaren. Why should I believe his interpretation over John MacArthur's or Charles Spurgeon's for example?

Why is your interpretation correct and other Christians using the same bible incorrect?

You repeat the same question in different forms. My answer, and I think I said this before, is to listen / read everybody and choose whom to believe and pray that God lead you. If you don't believe anyone now then be it. Just wait and see. When you choose to believe in Christ you will be saved.

I believe my theology is mostly Greek Orthodox as modified or explained by Melanchthon and Wesley. NT Wright expresses the same beliefs I have, except much more eloquently. If you're willing to spend the energy, start with Orthodox books.

SVS Press Books

What did Jesus sacrifice exactly?

When God takes on a the body and soul of a human being, this is a sacrifice. And when He is abused by people, this is a sacrifice. And when He is crucified and suffers, this is a sacrifice.

If you willingly live in poverty and suffer for a mistake or a character failure of a family member or a spouse or a friend, this is a sacrifice.

 

[miknik5]

Clizby,

Do you have a response for post 49 regarding the holiness of GOD...and the....unholiness of men?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

But you were not a first hand witness to this. You had those before you who had discovered this and had given their words and evidence to believe this...

And we believe based on their words and evidence.

I can look at the pictures and movies and see it is spherical shape. These are not eyewitness accounts. I can review the experiments done by a multitude of people that provides good evidence it is spherical. Anyone can do these experiments themselves. There is so much confirmation that the earth is spherical that you need conspiracy theories to believe otherwise.

You believe in Jesus because you believe the eyewitness accounts are true. I believe in a spherical earth because of overwhelming evidence that I can examine. There is a big difference.