If Jesus Christ Died To Save The World and Save Us From Our Sins

[Solomon]

Then what else needs to be done? Why would we even need to "believe", or worship, or anything? What difference would it make if you believed in something else? Wouldn't we all be "saved"?

[msongs]

1. umm jesus died (allegedly) and the post death is the christ character nt

[RandomThoughts]

2. There are many views on how that works.

It is a long topic.

[darkstar3]

3. That would be one of the major points of contention that fractured Christianity.

In short, it depends highly on who you ask.

[iris27]

61. Really? I'm not aware of any major groups of Christanity who believe that Jesus'

sacrifice counts for everyone regardless of whether they believe in him or not. I think the Universalists did before merging with the Unitarians to become UU, but now they're mostly just "no creeds/all are welcome".

[darkstar3]

64. I was referring more to the question "what else needs to be done?"

Works, indulgences, behavior, beliefs, prayers, meditation, fasting....

All those things that different denominations of Christians argue about far too often...

[struggle4progress]

4. The teaching is: we should love our neighbors as we love ourselves

The natural commentary is: easier said than done

[darkstar3]

6. Depends on who you ask.

I was always taught that it is most important to love Jesus with all your heart, mind, and soul. All else is transitory.

[trotsky]

16. Again, lousy advice for a masochist.

One-size-fits-all, black-and-white theology was supposedly the realm of the right-wing fundies. Strange to encounter it so often on here too.

[ET Awful]

5. If God is omnipotent, why is an intermediary required for his forgiveness?

If God is omnipotent is it not within his power to grant forgiveness without the need to snuff out his only begotten son?

[RC]

7. Hmmm, I detect some hereticisy here abouts.

:evilgrin:

[MindandSoul]

8. I agree. . .and I came to the conclusion that. . .we do not need an intermediary

either to talk to God or to obtain forgiveness from God.

God gave us free will. . .and men gave us dogmas.

Although I respect that those dogmas (with all the various flavors of the various religions. . .and not limited ot Christianity) can at time provide great guidance and support for people (especially children), they are by no means the "word of God," but a vague (and often varied) translation of the "word of God" by MEN (as in . . .no women participate in the many translations/interpretations of the Bible, in "writing" the New Testament, or in establishing the dogmas of the various religions - - -especially NOT Roman Catholicism!)

So, for anyone with a working brain, good will, and a social conscience, the best way to "get in touch" with God is to look inside oneself and in the natural world around us and realize that. . .that is where God's real home is. . .not in a material building, no matter how expensive and beautiful it is!

But. . .I realize that this is just a very personal opinion, and I do not mean to offend anyone with my opinion.

[Angry Dragon]

24. You speak of the Gospel of St. Thomas

""So, for anyone with a working brain, good will, and a social conscience, the best way to "get in touch" with God is to look inside oneself and in the natural world around us and realize that. . .that is where God's real home is. . .not in a material building, no matter how expensive and beautiful it is!""

St.Thomas believe that god existed in all of us and that is where one looked to truly find god. The church decided against this when they sat down to decide which books to put in the bible. It did not fit with their plans. Went against finding god in a church so they had to protect themselves.

edit: to add quotes

[onager]

62. Because somebody has to collect the money.

That's why religions need intermediaries.

[FLyellowdog]

9. And furthermore,

if god is all-knowing, why do we have to pray for health, happiness, etc.? Doesn't he already know what we need? I don't understand why we have to ask.Seems like a lot of redundancy to me. :shrug:

[Webster Green]

10. Actually, you're supposed to eat his body and drink his blood.

That's why I got totally creeped out and bailed out of the Catholic Church.

I'm not real big on cannibalism. :scared:

[pokerfan]

11. It's complicated

The universe was created by an all-powerful, all-knowing being who came down to us in the form of a cosmic Jewish zombie (who was his own father) who can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh, drink his blood, and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.

[Divine Discontent]

14. nothing hateful about that at all...

we can disagree, and state we doubt the beliefs of others (as I do), but still be respectful to each other in stating we don't agree as they might. we don't need to be so acidic and immature and in our responses that we try and blanket the discussion with discord...

[trotsky]

15. You seem to have confused the word "hateful" with the word "irreverent."

Now if we had blasphemy laws, what that person just said could land them in jail. Would you be happy with that? Or is it better if we all just have to put up with people saying things that tweak our deeply-held beliefs once in a while?

[Divine Discontent]

22. saying they're clearly hateful doesn't mean I want them in jail. thanks for implying that however.

I never said they were committing blasphemy and should be arrested, you did. Even if I feel they are, it's not, nor should be a law, but I can tell them they're being acidic and hateful. It's freedom of speech on his part, and mine. He went over the line into uncivil behavior. He can say it's all made up hooey in his opinion, but the most sticky of sarcasm bleeds from his words.

[trotsky]

25. You are the one who took offense.

You want your religious beliefs put on a pedestal, to be immune from even the mildest mocking. How is your reaction different other than in degree from the Muslims who freaked out over cartoons featuring Mohammed?

[Divine Discontent]

41. connecting my comments to the death threats that some Islamofascists have made against cartoonists

Lars Vilks, Kurt Westergaard, and McFarlane, is scraping the bottom of the barrel. You have issues conversing without throwing a pile of shit at the person you're talking to. Nowhere did imply anything that relates to the slanderous BS you typed up.

finally, someone to use ignore on.

[laconicsax]

42. If the shoe fits, wear it.

You seem to have elected to read trotsky's comment with a selective eye. He explained how your reaction is different from those extremists, yet you chose to accuse him of the opposite. Your reaction in this matter is similar to extremists, but not the same. You're whining for the same basic reason they issue threats--an inability to tolerate opposing viewpoints and criticism.

If you can't handle people the free exchange of ideas, why then do you read a political message board, or any Internet forum for that matter?

[Divine Discontent]

43. your comment is one of the more baseless attacks I've seen on DU

His comments to me made a really large jump, when I merely stated we should be more civil about others beliefs than to mock them derisively. He takes the call of being more respectful to each other in posts as being somehow akin to the putrid death-threat actions against cartoonists - that's ridiculous. Telling another poster to respect fellow DUers instead of striking discourse gets that kind of response?

But, your post is much worse and embarrassing for you.

If this is the kind of posts you make - outlandish overboard insults, then, sheesh, enjoy yelling with yourself.

[trotsky]

46. Let me ask you something. Well, some things.

Do you think non-Muslims should make their women cover themselves in burqas so we respect Muslim beliefs?

Should we all refrain from eating pork to respect Jewish and Muslim beliefs?

Should we outlaw abortion so we respect right-wing Christian beliefs?

Just wondering where you draw the line. Thanks.

[laconicsax]

53. I think we're being ignored.

Don't you love it when thin-skinned theists saunter in, accuse atheists of intolerance for criticizing religion, then put anyone who disagrees on ignore?

[trotsky]

54. It's easier than answering the tough questions.

Can't blame them.

[laconicsax]

55. What tough questions?

"Do you believe in free speech?"
"Do you think that religious ideas should be exempt from examination?"

Those are tough questions?

[trotsky]

57. Tough to justify the double standard, you bet! n/t

[pokerfan]

58. I think I was ignored first!

I win! :bounce:

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[laconicsax]

51. You really don't get it, do you?

Your 'call for greater civility' is a call for religious beliefs to be off-limits for discussion. You've yet to explain why you think that a person's religious beliefs should be treated any differently than their other beliefs, indicating that when you say "civil," you're really pleading for them to be left alone for no reason.

Muslim extremists want people to hold their beliefs with the same reverence that they do.
You want people to hold other's religious beliefs with the same reverence that you do.

The only difference is that you aren't threatening to kill people because of it.

[trotsky]

45. I'm simply asking how they differ other than in degree.

No, you aren't calling for someone's death. But you were exhibiting the exact same reaction - getting quite angry at someone who was poking a little fun at certain religious beliefs. Being confronted with this comparison, you got even angrier.

You have issues conversing without throwing a pile of shit at the person you're talking to.

Likewise.

[darkstar3]

19. Would you say the same

about a bumper sticker that said "buck fush?" The supposed immaturity and disrespect are there, but we give it a pass and don't accuse the owner of blanketing political discussion with discord.

Why does religion deserve kid gloves?

[Divine Discontent]

23. apples n oranges. no one's gonna confuse B*sh for a 'god'

[darkstar3]

27. Putting aside for the moment that some did deify him,

your objection was based on the nature of the language used. You claimed it was immature and only served to lower the level of discourse. I maintain that this is an apples to apples comparison using that metric.

[laconicsax]

26. Where is he incorrect?

"The universe was created by an all-powerful, all-knowing being who came down to us in the form of a cosmic Jewish zombie (who was his own father) who can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh, drink his blood, and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree."

All of that is directly supported by scripture and/or tradition. "Zombie" and "rib-woman" may not be the best words, but they accurately describe the situation in the Bible--Jesus does fit the definition of "zombie" minus the brain-eating, and Eve was fashioned from a rib.

[pokerfan]

30. Catholics would probably object to the word 'symbolically'

[laconicsax]

37. Depends on who you ask.

I remember chuckling when I learned that many 'rank-and-file' Catholics don't share the same view of Communion as the Church leadership.

[Still Blue in PDX]

71. My gosh, I used to believe that.

Of course, with God, all things are possible.

:D

As I drove by a church this past week the thought crossed my mind that it looked like a nice place and I ought to visit it sometime. That was a huge WTF moment.

[pokerfan]

29. You confuse derision with hatred

[Deep13]

48. Nothing inaccurate about it.

The problem isn't that people ridicule it. The problem is that it is inherently ridiculous.

[uberllama42]

59. Well, I've never understood the "Jesus is a zombie" meme

I just don't see it. Being resurrected is not the same as turning into a mindless animated corpse. Hell, in some zombie fiction, you don't even die before becoming a zombie.

If people want to make fun of Jesus, that's fine with me. Go ahead. But the zombie thing, while doubtless many people find it funny, doesn't make any sense. I agree that the whole story is silly, and ridicule comes easily. The zombie meme fits in fine. I just don't think it's an accurate description of what happens in the story.

[ChadwickHenryWard]

69. I tried reading

The Last Temptation of Christ last year, but only made it about halfway through. It was far too silly. All this wandering around in the desert, fasting, having visions. And then wandering around telling people what to do. I made it about to the wedding in Cana, I think. Jesus was such an unbelievable character; he had no motivation. First as the Crossmaker (helping the Romans murder countless Hebrews, rendering him an unlikeable character to boot) then an ascetic in the desert, then as wandering sage telling everybody what to believe. There was no reason, there was no clear cause-and-effect chain of events. Everything just sort of happened because that's how the myth went. There was no point at which I understood why Jesus was doing what he was doing, or why his disciples were following him. And that's not to mention the magic - spirits, ghosts, exorcisms, that Curse walking around depicted as some sort of Egyptian or Assyrian hawk-headed goddess, weird visions. It became impossible to take seriously.

[jemelanson]

12. Except that if this were the accepted way that it works then what

would Christianity have to sell? What reason would it have to exist? How could it attract believers if not for the threat of eternal damnation and burning is the Christian Hell? What would be their product to sell to the people of the world?


What would they use to control humanity if not for their salvation? Even if that salvation is forced upon a population at the point of a sword, gun or threat of being burned at a stake, or other such wonderful invention of the "Church" to force their control on people who did not want or seek their brand of Faith and Salvation?


You are trying to apply logic to something that defies logic or critical thought or reason.

[Solomon]

17. I'm just asking because that's what I'm told everyday by

Christians. That Jesus died to save our souls. It just seems to me that if we are not "saved", then he died in vain, and that doesn't make sense either.

[ironbark]

18. Do you really believe that’s how Christianity spread throughout the Roman Empire

to Europe and beyond?

That through Hellfire and Brimstone and “threat of eternal damnation” they out savaged the Romans and cowered the wimpy Huns, Vikings and Britons with “salvation forced upon a population at the point of a sword”?

Seriously. Is this the historical picture you have of the spread of Christianity “the point of a sword, gun or threat of being burned at a stake”?

[darkstar3]

20. While hell and brimstone were later additions,

Christianty WAS spread at the point of a sword, or did you forget that it was with Constantine's backing that Christianity really started to spread through the Roman Empire and then beyond?

[struggle4progress]

31. The Romans weren't Brights, like some of our posters here. Sure,

they conquered the known world, and exacted from the conquered territories slaves and tribute that sustained one of the great classical empires, across which they built great roads and aqueducts -- but confronted with the claim Oh, by the way, you guys accidentally crucified God, who happened to be wandering around Judea a few years back in the guise of a Jewish peasant, just as if He were a common criminal! Remember Judea? That's one of those small countries you completely destroyed a few years back, because everybody there was so troublesome -- the Romans suddenly felt all woozie and weak-kneed, as if they'd over-gorged on some bad stuffed grape leaves at an all-day banquet, and so the Roman empire in all its glory collapsed, and the Dark Ages fell upon the Earth

[ironbark]

38. Oh come on, those Judeans had concealed an RMD, Religion of Mass Destruction!

The police action was necessary to eliminate one end of the Axle of Evil, to establish Roman Democracy, pave new roads to the future and turn Jerusalem into a safe haven Green Zone against zealous terrorists.
And you just want to whine about a little collateral damage.
You should be proud and grateful for the work done by our friends at Herod & Halliburton Inc.

;-)

[darkstar3]

39. Just exactly what point are you trying to make?

That the Roman Empire had no business in Judaea? That you have no idea how the Holy Roman Empire actually fell? Perhaps that you didn't know the Romans were actually pushing Christianity through the Holy Roman Empire?

Something else?

[ironbark]

44. I tried for months to explain the basic principle of reciprocity to you….

Post after post after post pointing out that it’s just basic manners- I answer all your points/questions- you answer a couple of mine… every now and then.

It never happened.
You would not even acknowledge the issue of your evasion.
In the end I gave up responding because you made it patently clear you would not answer a single question-

Hmmm…And what a pity you can not/will not respond to the core points/questions.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=246566&mesg_id=246646

And you still can’t answer a straight question-
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=246566&mesg_id=246648

Still cant answer a single pertinent question re your own pov?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=246566&mesg_id=246759


‘Reciprocity starts here or the discussion necessarily terminates.
I’m not playing- I answer all your points/questions you ignore/misrepresent all mine any more.”
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=214x247695#247790

Now you follow me round asking questions and seeming to expect an answer.

Please don’t bother.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[darkstar3]

49. Who is following whom?

I don't believe my reply was addressed to you, so your claim and your attack are baseless.

[jemelanson]

56. First it became THE religion of the Holy Roman Empire.

Then it proceeded to put an end to Education, Medicine, Arts, Sciences and managed to bring about the "Dark Ages", when the Crusades did not bring Europe and the Middle East into line the "Church" continued its spread by force, by the Inquisition and other such peaceful means of forcing their religion on any people that they came into contact with. It took until the Protestant Reformation and the reformation that followed and the Calvinist Movement that they finally forced Europe to Accept this Peaceful and loving religion. This was also about the time that the Catholics finally decided that they were losing too much money and land by allowing their priests to have wives and children and they, the priests, were leaving property to their sons because by this time women were not allowed to hold property. So the Church ordered their priests to toss their wives into the street and to sell their children into slavery. Any priest that did not comply were thrown out of the church and hunted down and killed.

This is the same type of tactic that was used against the native populations of the Americas, the Pacific Islands, Australia, Africa, and the East. Yes this is how Christianity has been spread. By taking of native children and force them to become Christians, forbidding the use of native languages, and destruction of native cultures. read up on how the American Indians were treated. The Hawaiian Islanders were threated in a similar manner. You do not have to believe me, do some research on your own. Question what you have been told. The victor is the one who writes the history.

[struggle4progress]

63. You think "the Holy Roman Empire" led to "the Dark Ages"?

:rofl:

Do you also think Ben Franklin's electricity experiments led to the Renaissance?

[jemelanson]

65. No I think that the spread of the Christian religion led to

"The Dark Ages".

[struggle4progress]

66. The quality of your historical thinking is clearly indicated by what you write:

"First it became THE religion of the Holy Roman Empire. Then it proceeded to put an end to Education, Medicine, Arts, Sciences and managed to bring about the Dark Ages."

The period in Europe, sometimes called the Dark Ages, ended before there anything was ever called "the Holy Roman Empire." Rome fell and the Dark Ages began half a millennium before anything like "the Holy Roman Empire" existed

[jemelanson]

67. Silly me I forgot that I was answering someone who thinks that

the evils committed by those who profess to be Christians are not evils at all but Social Ills. Like the Inquisition was a social ill. Like the crusades were social ills. My mistake.

[struggle4progress]

68. Your logic is as dreadful as your reading comprehension and historical knowledge:

you will nowhere find me making a claim like self-professed Christians cannot commit evil deeds -- but, of course, even if I had made such an idiotic claim, it would have absolutely no bearing on your bizarre assertion that the Holy Roman Empire came before the Dark Ages

[Indi Guy]

13. With a Bifurcated Premise (Question) - You ask Four Destinct Questions Here...

Where do you want to go?

[K8-EEE]

21. Because how could religions rack in the dough (and power) saving people

If they're already saved by Jesus? Obviously, we all need their "help and guidance" to "be saved" and we need to pledge allegiance to various sects and write them weekly checks for life and vote the way they tell us that God wants.

The biggest con in the world is "do what my magic book says and you'll be saved --- you'll find out AFTER YOU DIE! PROMISE!"

[Solomon]

33. Isn't that insulting the person they claim is God?

I've often asked Christians, why do they pay so much attention to Paul. Was Jesus's message incomplete? How could he be God but deliver an incomplete message such that somebody like Paul had to come behind him and "clarify" things? Seems like the churches use Jesus' name all the time, but they really preach Paul. Listen to a lot of sermons. It's always Paul said this and Paul said that. Then when they sing, it's all about Jesus.

[K8-EEE]

35. "Paulism" is Freeper for Christianity and it's nothing but a hoax

There might be some good in Jesus's teachings but it's all been turned into a joke for those using it for wealth, power, influence and conquest.

[AlecBGreen]

72. Paul was imperfect

Im a Christian and I support equal rights for my GLBT brothers and sisters. This confounds some of the conservative Christians I know. "Its against the Bible!" they shout. There are basically 2 spots in the whole bible that mention homosexuality and say its wrong: the old testament calls it an abomination (right along with shellfish and two-fabric clothing) and Paul mentions. Without getting too deep into Paul, reading Ive done suggests he was talking about pederasty, not committed, loving relationships. Regardless, my reply is this: "I follow Jesus, not Paul." Christs main message was salvation through love, and the condemnation of hypocracy. If Jesus had wanted to condemn homosexuality, he would have. Instead, he was silent.

[GeorgeGist]

28. Perhaps ...

Jesus' death was a waste of time.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

32. More importantly, if we can't find evidence for the biblical Jesus

Does the question even matter? A lot of things become moot if his mere existence is in question.

[Solomon]

34. Not really. Think about it. The effect that the story has had on

humans is completely unconnected with whether he was real or not.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

36. Your question seemed to be more of a personal question

than one related to humanity. I think the myth of Jesus has had an enormous effect on civilizations - for me personally, not so much.

[troubledamerican]

40. Jesus died to save GUNS and the 2nd Amendment, you silly traitor.

[LAGC]

52. Don't you know? God is a pompous diety, he demands penance.

And that, my friends, is how we know God is a male, because a woman diety would never behave so arrogantly.

[iris27]

60. Because if you didn't need to believe it happened in order for it to count, then why would Jesus

have had to go through all that drama in the first place? Why couldn't God have just snapped his fingers and said "World, all is forgiven!"? Seems like a rather goofy exercise to put Oneself through just to satisfy Your own internal sense of sacrifice and balance.

At least, that's the thought process that I went through on the penultimate leg of my journey from LCMS-Lutheran, to searching for a non-woman-hating denomination, to a brief stop in "Jesus' resurrection counts for all" land, to generic deism, to atheism.

[Solomon]

70. The progression is amazing isn't it? LOL

It takes a while to not be afraid of the doubts and then to explore them. Once you do that, you're on the road to no return. LOL

I think the amount of time it takes corresponds to the level of indoctrination we were sumitted to as children.