I fully realize that biblical texts don't mean a whole lot on this forum, but I would like to discuss one issue related to forgiveness. In I Corinthians 6:2 Paul says that the "saints will judge the world." For Paul, "saints" meant believers. In John 20:33, Jesus said to his followers that "if you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them...." So, assume that Christians will judge the world, as Paul says. According to the John passage, they could forgive any sin. Why wouldn't they forgive everyone so that no one would be condemned?
While I do agree with you that it seems humanity would forgive each other.
However, if this is so, it 1. makes God a liar stating that death is a result of sin and 2. Makes God's Son's death totally unnecessary.
One more thought. When we ask for forgiveness, are we not to ask forgiveness of those we sin against AND then ask for God's? God can only forgive sin through Jesus...at least this is the way I see it. If we are forgiven by men...that only says we have man's forgiveness. Man is not the Creator and Sustainer of life. Our forgiveness from a man means nothing in the great scheme of things.
I'm very glad that neither Christians nor their god will be judging the world, and what's written in the Bible is no more true or relevant to my life than what's written in the Wind in the Willows. Personally, I don't need forgiveness from Christians or their sky fairy because I don't commit 'sin' in the first place!
Quoting from the Bible means nothing to an atheist, it's just a book written by lots of different superstitious unenlightened people over hundreds of years a couple of thousand years ago. The likelihood of Christians or their god judging us after death is on a par with Anubis weighing our hearts against a feather!
Your belief in judgement and forgiveness / condemnation is as ridiculous and outdated to an atheist as this image may appear to you;
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg208.imageshack.us%2Fimg208%2F7883%2Fanubis.gif&hash=2ecf681610552a233fba80c487d068b5f03eae43) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/208/anubis.gif/)
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on November 16, 2011, 05:04:38 AMSo, assume that Christians will judge the world, as Paul says. According to the John passage, they could forgive any sin. Why wouldn't they forgive everyone so that no one would be condemned?
I've encountered some Christians who say that the Bible tells them that they are not only empowered to judge the world, but required to do so. The thing is, most of them that believe this are also rather quick to assert that those who call themselves Christians who do not agree with them are heretics. So they judge not only the godless blasphemers against the Holy Ghost (
pfb) like myself, but their putative brothers and sisters in Christ. These folks seem to relish their supposed commission from YHVH/Jesus/HG, and generally don't seem to be inclined to forgiveness. In regards to the question you ask, I would answer that such people believe that their god is a vengeful god, and that the best way to serve him is to emulate his character. That is, they don't see forgiveness as a high priority.
My point in mentioning this topic was not to suggest that atheists care about what is written in the New Testament. It was simply to pose a hypothetical: if Christians are to judge the world, and if they have the power to forgive anyone, why wouldn't they do it? The idea that this would somehow nullify the atonement seems misguided to me. It would merely extend the atonement to all people. A judge will have some discretion in his rulings, and can order probation instead of having a sentence carried out. If the judicial power is combined with executive power, the judge could also commute or pardon.
I would not be able to send another human being to eternal torment, if such a thing exists. If that disqualifies me as a judge, so be it. But assuming for the sake of argument that Jesus is who he says he is and that he gave believers the power to judge and to forgive, it seems as though forgiveness would be the norm. Didn't he teach us to love our enemies, to forgive and not to condemn?
it's just a pointless hypothetical to an atheist, as it's not going to happen. A bit like asking 'if hypothetically Anubis does exist, could he really condemn any of us to be devoured by Ammut if our hearts weighed more than a feather?'
I also think that any Christians who believe that they are going to get to judge the rest of humanity are living in a very self-delusional little world. But it's nice to know that you won't be condemning us all to eternal torment if you're ever placed in that hypothetical situation, if ever I find myself sporting a jackal's head in the afterlife, I'll extend the same courtesy to you or any other Christian when I come to weigh your heart.
Quote from: Too Few Lions on November 16, 2011, 03:53:07 PM
I also think that any Christians who believe that they are going to get to judge the rest of humanity are living in a very self-delusional little world. But it's nice to know that you won't be condemning us all to eternal torment if you're ever placed in that hypothetical situation, if ever I find myself sporting a jackal's head in the afterlife, I'll extend the same courtesy to you or any other Christian when I come to weigh your heart.
Well, thank you. Now I can die in peace! ;D
How many Christians are required to forgive, all of them, some of them, one of them?
These quotes you have presented are quite consistent with my perception of the bible, vague and nonsensical. Time to start studying a better book, me thinks. This one has been done to death.
Quote from: Stevil on November 16, 2011, 06:03:05 PM
How many Christians are required to forgive, all of them, some of them, one of them?
These quotes you have presented are quite consistent with my perception of the bible, vague and nonsensical. Time to start studying a better book, me thinks. This one has been done to death.
Saying you forgive someone of something does not absolve that person to the consequences of that act. If I steal your money and I ask for forgiveness, I'm sure I'd get it, but does that remove the consequences of that act? From now on you'll be looking at me a bit closer and/or I may go to jail for a time or get fined...whatever it is, I cannot avoid the consequence.
Every person that has lived will be forgiven. No question about that in my mind There is a consequence for being a human separated from God by sin, however minor that sin is. The question, I know I've mentioned before here at HAF, is who is going to pay the consequence of sin? (in the scenario of the Bible and God) If you choose to be apart from God, then you pay for it yourself. Death. If you claim the Savior, then His death is counted as your death and the debt is paid...and you live. The difference is only God can forgive AND restore. Man can only forgive.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on November 16, 2011, 07:07:22 PM
Quote from: Stevil on November 16, 2011, 06:03:05 PM
How many Christians are required to forgive, all of them, some of them, one of them?
These quotes you have presented are quite consistent with my perception of the bible, vague and nonsensical. Time to start studying a better book, me thinks. This one has been done to death.
Saying you forgive someone of something does not absolve that person to the consequences of that act. If I steal your money and I ask for forgiveness, I'm sure I'd get it, but does that remove the consequences of that act? From now on you'll be looking at me a bit closer and/or I may go to jail for a time or get fined...whatever it is, I cannot avoid the consequence.
Every person that has lived will be forgiven. No question about that in my mind There is a consequence for being a human separated from God by sin, however minor that sin is. The question, I know I've mentioned before here at HAF, is who is going to pay the consequence of sin? (in the scenario of the Bible and God) If you choose to be apart from God, then you pay for it yourself. Death. If you claim the Savior, then His death is counted as your death and the debt is paid...and you live. The difference is only God can forgive AND restore. Man can only forgive.
So I'm separated from something that doesn't exist by something that doesn't exist. I hope you can see how ridiculous your argument sounds to an atheist.
I live, then I die like any other animal, and I'm happy with that. I'll just enjoy my life while I'm here.
Quote from: Too Few Lions on November 16, 2011, 07:56:49 PM
So I'm separated from something that doesn't exist by something that doesn't exist. I hope you can see how ridiculous your argument sounds to an atheist.
I live, then I die like any other animal, and I'm happy with that. I'll just enjoy my life while I'm here.
You can either engage in the topic or keep suggesting how rediculous it sounds to you. Obviously we are on an Atheist forum so I can expect this type of reply, but when the OP prefaces the question with 'lets assume for arguments sake' it seems unnecessary for you to continue posting the obvious position of this forum. I tend to think there are some that MIGHT find the thoughts and ideas resulting from this interesting.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on November 16, 2011, 07:07:22 PM
Every person that has lived will be forgiven.
How do we have knowledge of this 'fact'?
What does forgiveness mean? What is the tangible outcome of having been forgiven?
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on November 16, 2011, 07:07:22 PM
There is a consequence for being a human separated from God by sin, however minor that sin is. The question, I know I've mentioned before here at HAF, is who is going to pay the consequence of sin? (in the scenario of the Bible and God)
How do we have knowledge of this 'fact'? How do we know that those who sin pay the consequence of death? You said Jesus did not sin and yet he died. All humans die regardless of whether we sin or not. Please don't tell me that the still born child has sinned.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on November 16, 2011, 07:07:22 PM
If you choose to be apart from God, then you pay for it yourself. Death.
I have not chosen to be apart from any gods, no more than I have chosen to be apart from the loch ness monster.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on November 16, 2011, 07:07:22 PM
If you claim the Savior, then His death is counted as your death and the debt is paid...and you live. The difference is only God can forgive AND restore. Man can only forgive.
How do we have knowledge of this 'fact'?
All humans die eventually, even though some claim Jesus as their saviour. Does this mean that Jesus is not the Saviour?
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on November 16, 2011, 08:35:58 PM
You can either engage in the topic or keep suggesting how rediculous it sounds to you. Obviously we are on an Atheist forum so I can expect this type of reply, but when the OP prefaces the question with 'lets assume for arguments sake' it seems unnecessary for you to continue posting the obvious position of this forum. I tend to think there are some that MIGHT find the thoughts and ideas resulting from this interesting.
Yes, we're on an atheist forum, and you've just reeled off a load of theological speculation as if it were fact. It's just your opinion, and I can't really debate over things that don't exist (for me). I think Stevil takes your argument apart rather nicely in the post above. Atheists don't choose to be apart from your (or any other) god, it's like saying we choose to be apart from the tooth fairy, it just doesn't exist for us to have any relationship with.
Quote from: Stevil on November 16, 2011, 11:16:44 PM
How do we have knowledge of this 'fact'?
What does forgiveness mean? What is the tangible outcome of having been forgiven?
Fact? Is it really that difficult to understand, 'for arguments sake'? I don't think the OP is meant to prove anything.
Forgiveness means one is excused or even pardoned from an act against another or a law. Between friends it may simply be a release of anger or a harboring of resentment of a certain act against the other. Everyone is offered this second type of forgiveness from God at any moment. The former type, or pardon, is only offered to those that pay the penalty for an act against another or against law. When a believer is forgiven, he/she claims belief in Christ and claims His death as theirs. For arguments sake, God can now justify by his own death, the life of a sinner. However when an unbeliever gets forgiveness, he/she must die to pay for the act(s) against God's law (we know according to biblical claim - and for arguments sake, one sin can damn a person) the problem the unbeliever has is that God cannot then justify their forgiveness AND life everlasting as the wages of sin is death. God is able to justify believers through Christ because Christ died apart from sin. Christ (while being God himself) was raised by God (the father) because the Son was innocent to sin, yet died as the penalty of sin ONCE for all. Just like Adam (and Eve) sinned once and therefore damned all of their offspring, so Christ has died and offers life to all that will accept the gift. --Apologies if that is preachy, but in a nutshell that is the Good News Christians speak of and the definition of forgiveness from God --
Quote from: StevilHow do we have knowledge of this 'fact'? How do we know that those who sin pay the consequence of death? You said Jesus did not sin and yet he died. All humans die regardless of whether we sin or not. Please don't tell me that the still born child has sinned.
The still born child, while it has not sinned directly, it is genetically handed down from Adam. I don't know what God will do about children or infants or still born babies...there is no explicit words to that subject. We therefore expect God will be fair and merciful.
We won't really know this consequence until the end, but we are told of the consequence before so we have a choice.
Quote from: StevilI have not chosen to be apart from any gods, no more than I have chosen to be apart from the loch ness monster.
True, but also, you are not without knowldege of the Loch Ness Monster should it be a god, nor of the Christian God should He be God.
Quote from: StevilHow do we have knowledge of this 'fact'?
All humans die eventually, even though some claim Jesus as their saviour. Does this mean that Jesus is not the Saviour?
Again, we are discussing 'for arguments sake'. Nothing can be proven until the time comes...if it does, for arguments sake.
but what if (like me) you haven't ever sinned? and also (like me) you've not inherited any sin because you're not descended from Adam and Eve (because they're mythical) and also (like me) you don't require any forgiveness from any god, be it Yahweh or Anubis? Then speculation on divine forgiveness are a bit pointless aren't they?
Quote from: Too Few Lions on November 17, 2011, 01:14:41 AM
Then speculation on divine forgiveness are a bit pointless aren't they?
If you find it impossible to discuss within the frame of this thread, maybe you would find it less stressful to simply avoid this specific thread.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on November 17, 2011, 01:36:24 AM
Quote from: Too Few Lions on November 17, 2011, 01:14:41 AM
Then speculation on divine forgiveness are a bit pointless aren't they?
If you find it impossible to discuss within the frame of this thread, maybe you would find it less stressful to simply avoid this specific thread.
I'm not finding it stressful in the slightest, just pointless. And pointing out the pointlessness of theological speculation of a specific mythology on an atheist forum seems a perfectly reasonable thing to do.
I also think I am debating within the frame of this thread. I just asked you what if you don't carry any sin and don't require forgiveness from any deity? and I didn't receive a reply
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on November 16, 2011, 11:58:53 PM
The still born child, while it has not sinned directly, it is genetically handed down from Adam.
And you actually believe this? Sometimes i wonder if theists are just messing with me, because I have a really hard time accepting the fact there are people out there who believe this is not only true, but somehow relevant.
Quote from: Heisenberg on November 17, 2011, 01:48:40 AM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on November 16, 2011, 11:58:53 PM
The still born child, while it has not sinned directly, it is genetically handed down from Adam.
And you actually believe this? Sometimes i wonder if theists are just messing with me, because I have a really hard time accepting the fact there are people out there who believe this is not only true, but somehow relevant.
I have to say I find it ridiculous that anyone can call anyone else a 'sinner', as if it's their place to judge others, and really rather sick that anyone can look at an unborn baby that way
Quote from: Too Few Lions on November 17, 2011, 01:55:56 AM
Quote from: Heisenberg on November 17, 2011, 01:48:40 AM
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on November 16, 2011, 11:58:53 PM
The still born child, while it has not sinned directly, it is genetically handed down from Adam.
And you actually believe this? Sometimes i wonder if theists are just messing with me, because I have a really hard time accepting the fact there are people out there who believe this is not only true, but somehow relevant.
I have to say I find it ridiculous that anyone can call anyone else a 'sinner', as if it's their place to judge others, and really rather sick that anyone can look at an unborn baby that way
I don't know what else to say besides...
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F-u7BvzTOpubg%2FTmEMXQpZyeI%2FAAAAAAAAAWk%2Fmi3TwWKGwp8%2Fs1600%2Fzoolander-mugatu-crazy-pills.jpg&hash=160a27eba1076a02d600f1aa663e5dd16cfc709b)
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on November 16, 2011, 11:58:53 PM
Fact? Is it really that difficult to understand, 'for arguments sake'? I don't think the OP is meant to prove anything.
I am finding it difficult to distinguish what "for arguments sake" we are playing make believe and what you are pertaining as real consequences of that. This is a difficult task for me.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on November 16, 2011, 11:58:53 PM
Forgiveness means one is excused or even pardoned from an act against another or a law. Between friends it may simply be a release of anger or a harboring of resentment of a certain act against the other. Everyone is offered this second type of forgiveness from God at any moment.
Besides that we don't know whether the god has forgiven us, I personally have received no feedback, or conformation of its forgiveness.
Forgiveness in many ways is for the benefit of the person holding the anger or resentment, not for the person who has performed the offensive act.
If there is a god and if it feels offended or hurt by my behaviour and allows that to escalate into anger or resentment then that is more of a personal issue of the god, not myself. I couldn't care less if the god has these feelings towards me and is struggling to forgive me. I wouldn't even know as the god is non interactive. I can't even tell if this god exists let alone is fighting an inner battle to forgive me for my "sins".
I would offer advice for anyone (including this god) holding onto anger or resentment that it is certainly best to forgive and move on with your life. Life is way too short to waste it on petty things, spend your time with people you like, spend your time thinking about things or people you like rather than mulling over the things people have done that you find offensive, degrading or personally hurtful. There are simply better things to do than to hold onto grudges, it only eats yourself up, and odds are the person you are focusing the hate on probably doesn't even realise your issue, and probably didn't think anything of the alleged incident.
So if the god is offering forgiveness (and we have no confirmation of this) then the god is doing this for its own benefit, not ours. In many ways the god is being selfish and high and mighty with regards to its expectations that we should live by its moral standard, especial given that we don't know what its moral standard is and we don't understand why its moral standard is the right way and why our moral standard is the wrong way. If I were to judge the god of the old testament by my moral standard then this god would fail miserably. Even the courts of my country would find its behaviour reprehensible and it would be locked up for a very long time.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on November 16, 2011, 11:58:53 PM
When a believer is forgiven, he/she claims belief in Christ and claims His death as theirs. For arguments sake, God can now justify by his own death, the life of a sinner. However when an unbeliever gets forgiveness, he/she must die to pay for the act(s) against God's law (we know according to biblical claim - and for arguments sake, one sin can damn a person) the problem the unbeliever has is that God cannot then justify their forgiveness AND life everlasting as the wages of sin is death. God is able to justify believers through Christ because Christ died apart from sin. Christ (while being God himself) was raised by God (the father) because the Son was innocent to sin, yet died as the penalty of sin ONCE for all. Just like Adam (and Eve) sinned once and therefore damned all of their offspring, so Christ has died and offers life to all that will accept the gift.
If I were to believe in the Christian god, but were to retain my own moral standard, my own ability to think for myself on moral issues, and if I were confronted by this god and asked to accept the gift of Jesus death as atonement for my sins, I would refuse.
As a mature adult I feel it is important to accept responsibility for my own actions, I would never feel that someone else should take responsibility for what I have done. With regards to a blood sacrifice, I would never accept this as a gift to me. I find this reprehensible, disgusting behavior, I would not condone an innocent person's death especially if I could benefit from it. I want no part of it and really struggle with the way Christians look to this as something good. Firstly an all powerful god has no need or benefit from a blood sacrifice. Secondly how does a blood sacrifice relate to atonement? It doesn't, it only fulfills a psychopathic blood lust. This is not my style, not my desire, I find it offensive and reprehensible, I want no part of it.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on November 16, 2011, 11:58:53 PM
The still born child, while it has not sinned directly, it is genetically handed down from Adam.
In humans, genetics come from both the Mother and the Father. Our genetics is put together in a double helix, which is split down the middle when presented in egg or sperm form. Each egg or sperm contains only half the genetic material of each parent. When these two halves combine they contain the instructions for building a complete human being. Depending on the dominant and recessive genes the new human will take on specific characteristics of its mother and father, being similar but not the same. Often there is genetic mutation which is the source of evolution and is present in all animals not just humans. I have never before heard that sinful acts performed by the mother or father manifest themselves in DNA. It would be great if you could provide links that substantiate this comment of yours.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on November 16, 2011, 11:58:53 PM
We won't really know this consequence until the end, but we are told of the consequence before so we have a choice.
Please be more specific, we are told of the consequeces by whom? Who has this knowledge? Is there anything to suggest they didn't just make it up?
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on November 16, 2011, 11:58:53 PM
True, but also, you are not without knowldege of the Loch Ness Monster should it be a god, nor of the Christian God should He be God.
I am without knowledge of the Loch Ness Monster. I have seen photos of a person swimming and been told that it is Nessy, and with a bit of imagination I could imagine an aquatic animal with a strange shape. This is not knowledge however, it is imagination. We have no knowledge of the Loch Ness Monster, only stories. Same applies of the gods.
I thought I would jump in on this whole "Thoughts on Forgiveness" thing, but only in broad strokes. For me, this is a deeply personal subject, and a source of terrible sadness.
First thing, reading only a few posts into this discussion and I got fairly confused. Not a good thing. The next thing is that I find this forgiveness/condemnation/punishment problematic and dangerous, especially if there is confusion. I learned what I thought was a great Christian lesson once upon a time, yet this lead to phenomenal problems with my wife when I found myself trying to reconcile seemingly conflicting ideals of forgiveness.
I've mentioned elsewhere, something this fraught with peril stemming out of misunderstandings is completely unacceptable. As I've mentioned elsewhere, God is a big boy, supposedly capable of everything, can speak for an clarify his intentions, and therefore he has a responsibility to be clear in such important matters. Failing to be clear is negligence on his part! To keep it simple, if I've turned my back on the "Jesus is your savior" salvation option and He will not forgive me for my sins, then why would I forgive him for this (and many other instances) of failing to be clear in important matters. If I chose to forgive Him for being an idiot at communicating his "system" it makes me feel like I'm rising above his inability to forgive. I kind of feel like if I am capable of forgiving him for how he's failed myself and humanity, then he should be able to do the same for me. Think about it, though: I, a simple "lowly, unworthy" human can contemplate doing a thing that he cannot. What a jerk. I almost feel like doing this out of spite, except that I think I already have forgiven him to a certain extent. I won't rule out rescinding this though, since he can't rise to the occasion himself (HimDamned bloody incompetent!). I dare Him to do what I can do, forgive without a blood sacrifice. I double dare Him to forgive me, without the intervention of Jesus. I can do it, so can many (most!?) other people on this planet! He is God, after all.
Getting back to the lesson that I didn't seem to "get" in a realistically finely tuned way. I was at a church retreat one time, and they hashed out a lot of details regarding forgiveness. One major point was that we were expected to forgive, in order to expect to receive forgiveness from God (there is stake in salvation established here). For quite a lot of things, I didn't find it hard to forgive quite a lot. I'm fairly patient with people. Naturally, there were occasions where I struggled. A Christian friend discussed with me the notion of continuing to take abuse and consistently forgiving, on the grounds that it sows the seed of a softening the heart of the person who is endlessly wronging you and blah blah blah (at the cost of destroying a perfectly loyal Christian in exchange for only the chance of a new convert). In the face of this kind of self-destructive behavior to one's own personal well being, I'm always puzzled by the "tough love" Christians, and I don't understand why it seems like so many Christians support the Death Penalty. Not very generous, not very forgiving.
Despite this, and even after having turned away from Christianity, I still practice a generous amount of forgiveness (possibly to a fault). Now here's the really personal part. My (soon to be ex-)wife, who claims herself to be a Christian, had a very different take on forgiveness. While I was forgiving her faults unconditionally, while asking for change open-endedly, she completely withheld forgiveness unless/until I demonstrated a change in my faults which were bothering her. She would criticize me for a small grudges against certain people, even though they were mainly defensively motivated. So, despite her criticism that I did not forgive well enough for her liking, she didn't make much effort to let go of vindictive feelings towards me. I will point out at this juncture that some of my behaviors that she would not forgive were the coming from any one of the combined Five Comorbid Mental-Health issues that I've discovered I've been having to cope with all my life. Her "objectional" behaviors, which I constantly forgave, were part of her willful, prideful personality. She has confessed that some of the things she did as our marital relationship collapsed were unfair. I'm angry with her for throwing me out into the cold, having only freshly been diagnosed with all these mental health issues I'm having to cope with, and I'm having to learn how to live life on my own for the first time ever (I married and moved from my parents home to hers, something that a friend of mine also did successfully; so I had reason to believe it was workable). I will eventually, hopefully talk through with her why I am angry; and I think I will be ready to forgive (yet, to a certain extent, I think I have forgiven much, and she still does not).
So, these have been my traumatic experiences for the last couple of months. God can go to Hell for all I care. Really, I want him to burn in Hell, so he can understand what it is he does. Yet, I feel generous, too. I think it would be nice if He would get over Himself, and be receptive to some constructive criticism. I might feel forgiving if I saw some effort on his part; it doesn't even have to be in my own personal life, I would be impressed if he, say, turned things around for starving populations in Africa. Or spoke up and made his "plan" crystal clear, and took clarifying questions, in a live action recorded medium. Otherwise, he can go f*** Himself, and I wish Hell's torment on him.
Now back to my default mode of ignoring Him, and doing worthwhile stuff on this planet. Cheers; peace and love to all (except God).
If you can't discuss under a 'for arguments sake', then it is really impossible to convey to you (the Atheist) the ideas of Christianity in this manner and we can get back to arguing back and forth on what is or isn't right or provable.
We already know you think them to be gobbledygook. It's no surprise the responses, and yours would go well in a thread in which the aim is convince you on God and his forgiveness. This thread, at least the way I read the OP, is simply to discuss thoughts on forgiveness and what that means and maybe not ONLY what it means to a Christian, but also to an Atheist.
Genetics. I should've placed genetics in quotes because it is not meant that sin is passed through DNA (if it is, I'm not aware of how so). I have no explanation to prove how sin is passed.
Quote from: Stevil on November 17, 2011, 09:45:02 AMForgiveness in many ways is for the benefit of the person holding the anger or resentment, not for the person who has performed the offensive act.
Something that I wish I had learned earlier, rather than later. I only came across this while watching a Tyler Perry movie with my wife. She made a big deal out of reiterating it, yet ironically she failed to do this herself. I've simply collected it in order to incorporate into and rework my understanding of forgiveness.
Quote from: Tristan Jay on November 17, 2011, 04:09:17 PM
My (soon to be ex-)wife, who claims herself to be a Christian, had a very different take on forgiveness.
Hey there Tristan, I always enjoy reading your posts, I find them very interesting and honest. Although it is sad to hear about your trials.
I am certainly no expert on marriage, it is extremely complicated and everyone is different.
In my case, I found that my wife had a vision of a perfect husband. Of course I could not live up to this perfect standard. I spent a bit of effort to lower her bar on this. Now she has next to no expectation from a husband, so when I do something that she likes, she is pleasantly surprised rather than being disappointed when I don't live up to her expectations.
It is working so far, but nothing comes with a guarantee.
Quote from: AnimatedDirt on November 17, 2011, 04:11:47 PM
If you can't discuss under a 'for arguments sake', then it is really impossible to convey to you (the Atheist) the ideas of Christianity in this manner and we can get back to arguing back and forth on what is or isn't right or provable.
I thought I had done well with my last response to your post. Especially the second and third part.
I was playing make believe and I did address my feelings on what forgiveness means and why I would not "for aguments sake" accept the death of Jesus to wash away my sins, even if god and Jesus really exists.
This game is hard.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on November 16, 2011, 05:04:38 AM
I fully realize that biblical texts don't mean a whole lot on this forum, but I would like to discuss one issue related to forgiveness. In I Corinthians 6:2 Paul says that the "saints will judge the world." For Paul, "saints" meant believers. In John 20:33, Jesus said to his followers that "if you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them...." So, assume that Christians will judge the world, as Paul says. According to the John passage, they could forgive any sin. Why wouldn't they forgive everyone so that no one would be condemned?
I feel there is an aspect of exclusivity to Christianity. Believers go to heaven and non believers go to hell.
Obviously Christians put effort into their faith, they make sacrifices. I feel it is logical that they want to be rewarded for this. It is not much of a reward if everyone gets to have eternal happiness in heaven. Tragic as it may seem, many people take joy in others misery, it makes them feel special and privileged.
Quote from: Stevil on November 17, 2011, 06:11:53 PM
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on November 16, 2011, 05:04:38 AM
I fully realize that biblical texts don't mean a whole lot on this forum, but I would like to discuss one issue related to forgiveness. In I Corinthians 6:2 Paul says that the "saints will judge the world." For Paul, "saints" meant believers. In John 20:33, Jesus said to his followers that "if you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them...." So, assume that Christians will judge the world, as Paul says. According to the John passage, they could forgive any sin. Why wouldn't they forgive everyone so that no one would be condemned?
I feel there is an aspect of exclusivity to Christianity. Believers go to heaven and non believers go to hell.
Obviously Christians put effort into their faith, they make sacrifices. I feel it is logical that they want to be rewarded for this. It is not much of a reward if everyone gets to have eternal happiness in heaven. Tragic as it may seem, many people take joy in others misery, it makes them feel special and privileged.
Well, at least you answered the question straight on. This game is not so hard after all. Yes, I have heard more than one Christian state something to the effect of "if there isn't a hell, I'm going to be disappointed." I have a different view. Assuming for the sake of argument that Christians did judge the world, I would be inclinded to go very heavy on the forgiveness button. Perhaps there would be some who looked at the kingdom of God and concluded that they wanted nothing to do with it. I assume that they would be satisfied with simple annihilation (which is pretty much what all atheists expect, anyway). But I can't imagine any set of circumstances in which I would send anyone to a literal burning hell for eternity. But maybe I'm in the minority as a Christian.
Quote from: Stevil on November 17, 2011, 06:03:28 PM
Quote from: Tristan Jay on November 17, 2011, 04:09:17 PM
My (soon to be ex-)wife, who claims herself to be a Christian, had a very different take on forgiveness.
Hey there Tristan, I always enjoy reading your posts, I find them very interesting and honest. Although it is sad to hear about your trials.
Having had the chance to vent my frustrated thoughts on forgiveness, I was able to clear my head and go back to look through some of the other posts. My thoughts overlap on a couple of points regarding forgiveness and (the bizarre, needlessness of) God's system. I'm glad I read your post after I wrote mine, and it was rewarding to feel like I'm able to come to coherent conclusions through the cloud of how this stuff intersects with my personal life.
You've got some great points which I wish would enter the discourse more. I'm curious about the Christian thoughts on the appearance of a double standard on God's part, "for arguments sake." But not as a hostile challenge to their faith. I would like to see the rhetoric of "God works in mysterious ways" and "God is God, that's reason enough for what he does and why he's exempt from the rules he demands of us" be set aside, and address those issues; because obviously those are important issues that God and/or his followers really need to make a concerted effort to explore beyond the rhetoric, if saving as many people as possible is the ultimate goal.
QuoteYes, I have heard more than one Christian state something to the effect of "if there isn't a hell, I'm going to be disappointed."
In some sense, it's almost as if God's incompetency at forgiving sends the wrong message to Christians. They say the words, they listen to the sermon, yet I have to wonder if God's own example poisons the effectiveness of his intent, and Christians subconsciously rationalize their lapses in not forgiving because they are rationalizing away or trying to bury and ignore the failure of God's message.
Quote from: Tristan Jay on November 17, 2011, 11:18:08 PM
In some sense, it's almost as if God's incompetency at forgiving sends the wrong message to Christians. They say the words, they listen to the sermon, yet I have to wonder if God's own example poisons the effectiveness of his intent, and Christians subconsciously rationalize their lapses in not forgiving because they are rationalizing away or trying to bury and ignore the failure of God's message.
Yes, it does seem as if the typical theology of forgiving is missing the boat at times. "For the sake of argument" let's assume that the "facts" of Christianity are true (Jesus is the Son of God, he died "for our sins", he was buried, and he rose on the third day, seen by a number of witnesses), but see if there is another interpretation that fits the "facts." What if "dying for our sins" was not necessary because God needed some kind of sacrifice to appease his wrath or legal requirements, but instead was necessary because of the general mentality of human beings at the time? People 2000 years ago generally conceived of gods as needing to be appeased, and felt guilty or shameful because of their inability to keep whatever commandments their god required. So they sacrificed animals (or people) to appease the wrath of their god, and to keep in good standing with them. They all had some concept of their own "sinfulness" in the sense of falling short of their gods' requirements.
So Jesus accommodates this particular world view of mankind (which was also present in Judaism) and essentially says: "OK, I'm going to put an end to this "sin" thing altogether. I'll "die for your sins" once and for all, and eliminate the need for further sacrifice and shame and guilt, so we can then get on to the business of having an adult relationship where "sin" is not an issue anymore."
But "sin" is a big business, and without it priests and preachers have been deprived of their stock in trade. So the "sin" idea is kept alive after Jesus by organized religion, which has been reaping more benefits from "sin" than Las Vegas for 2000 years.
But if Jesus came to "take away the sin of the world" as the gospel of John says, then maybe from God's viewpoint it's not an issue anymore. Maybe organized religion is just deceiving us, and keeping us from having free communion with God. Jesus also said in John 8 that "if the Son makes you free, you shall be free indeed." I don't think sin is an issue with God anymore, so the only real forgiveness that needs to take place is forgiving oneself or forgiving others who have wronged you. God's already forgiven, if he actually had to in the first place. He didn't need the sacrifice of Jesus - humankind did. Maybe it's time to move beyond that to real freedom.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on November 18, 2011, 12:47:14 AMSo Jesus accommodates this particular world view of mankind (which was also present in Judaism) and essentially says: "OK, I'm going to put an end to this "sin" thing altogether. I'll "die for your sins" once and for all, and eliminate the need for further sacrifice and shame and guilt, so we can then get on to the business of having an adult relationship where "sin" is not an issue anymore."
I've focused on this part of your post for the sake of brevity, but I liked the whole post, and the ideas you throw out. How I wish and hope for this kind of maturity in a relationship with a Creator-Deity who is described as Wise and All-Knowing. Thank you for taking the time to sharing these thoughts and ideas. :)
Quote from: Tristan Jay on November 18, 2011, 01:15:42 AM
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on November 18, 2011, 12:47:14 AMSo Jesus accommodates this particular world view of mankind (which was also present in Judaism) and essentially says: "OK, I'm going to put an end to this "sin" thing altogether. I'll "die for your sins" once and for all, and eliminate the need for further sacrifice and shame and guilt, so we can then get on to the business of having an adult relationship where "sin" is not an issue anymore."
I've focused on this part of your post for the sake of brevity, but I liked the whole post, and the ideas you throw out. How I wish and hope for this kind of maturity in a relationship with a Creator-Deity who is described as Wise and All-Knowing. Thank you for taking the time to sharing these thoughts and ideas. :)
But it seems somewhat made up. Most Christians don't go with this idea. Are they all wrong, except for Ecurb? Does this mean that the bible, being the inspired word of god is such a failure that over a billion people whom have studied it, everyone of them except Ecurb have got it wrong, misunderstood, interpreted incorrectly what it is that god desperately wants people to know.
It seems to me very much that Christians do not want to know god or Jesus. They are much more comfortable inventing a personality that conforms to their own ideas. They then label this personality god or Jesus, tie it into some of the anecdotal stories of the bible such that they feel a common bond with other people whom state they they also believe in god and Jesus. They all quote names and events from the bible, but the interpretations are all different When the bible is clear and specific e.g. that people whom work on the Sabbath should be put to death, the vast, vast majority of Christians tend to interpret this not to mean that people whom work on the Sabbath should be put to death.
I really would like to see some Christians who are seeking the truth about god and Jesus rather than making stuff up in order to give themselves warm fuzzie feelings. Is it because they know that god is non material, non measurable, non interactive, that they are free to invent their own image of god as they please. No one will ever prove them wrong, so what is the harm in making it up?
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on November 18, 2011, 12:47:14 AM
What if "dying for our sins" was not necessary because God needed some kind of sacrifice to appease his wrath or legal requirements, but instead was necessary because of the general mentality of human beings at the time? People 2000 years ago generally conceived of gods as needing to be appeased, and felt guilty or shameful because of their inability to keep whatever commandments their god required. So they sacrificed animals (or people) to appease the wrath of their god, and to keep in good standing with them. They all had some concept of their own "sinfulness" in the sense of falling short of their gods' requirements.
I think your idea of ancient religion and peoples' attitude towards their gods isn't wholly accurate. I don't think civilised people (like the Greeks and Romans) generally sacrificed animals (and never people) to appease their gods 2000 years ago. Animals were killed in a ritual manner (like Halal) in the temple, and then eaten in a ritual feast in honour of the god(s), which often also involved drinking, music and dance. It wasn't generally done out of fear but in celebration and thanks, pagan religion was far more celebratory of life than Christianity.
QuoteSo Jesus accommodates this particular world view of mankind (which was also present in Judaism) and essentially says: "OK, I'm going to put an end to this "sin" thing altogether. I'll "die for your sins" once and for all, and eliminate the need for further sacrifice and shame and guilt, so we can then get on to the business of having an adult relationship where "sin" is not an issue anymore."
The problem with this argument is that sin was only a problem for the Jews and some early Christians. If people wanted to have a relationship with a god where sin wasn't an issue, they could have picked pretty much most of the other religions of the day, or even been gnostic Christians, who didn't believe in sin in the first place. By choosing what was to become orthodox Christianity, people were deliberately choosing a religion where sin was an issue.
QuoteBut "sin" is a big business, and without it priests and preachers have been deprived of their stock in trade. So the "sin" idea is kept alive after Jesus by organized religion, which has been reaping more benefits from "sin" than Las Vegas for 2000 years.
too true, and the promotion of the idea of sin has caused untold suffering and misery in the world.
QuoteBut if Jesus came to "take away the sin of the world" as the gospel of John says, then maybe from God's viewpoint it's not an issue anymore. Maybe organized religion is just deceiving us, and keeping us from having free communion with God. Jesus also said in John 8 that "if the Son makes you free, you shall be free indeed." I don't think sin is an issue with God anymore, so the only real forgiveness that needs to take place is forgiving oneself or forgiving others who have wronged you. God's already forgiven, if he actually had to in the first place. He didn't need the sacrifice of Jesus - humankind did. Maybe it's time to move beyond that to real freedom.
Mankind didn't need any such sacrifice (if any such sacrifice ever took place, and only a Christian could view Jesus' death as a sacrifice), as the majority of people alive at the time didn't believe in sin in the first place! The trouble with arguing that Jesus sets us free from sin, and your god's forgiven us from sin, is that sin is an imaginary thing that only exists if you're a Christian in the first place! We're being forgiven for an imaginary crime that we don't have to believe we ever comitted.
And yes, organised religion is a deception, but everything you believe (albeit in a generally unorthodox way) derives from an organised religion - Christianity. Jesus, Yahweh, the Bible, they're all products of organised religion. True freedom is atheism -no sin, no need for forgiveness.
Quote from: Stevil on November 18, 2011, 09:39:37 AM
Quote from: Tristan Jay on November 18, 2011, 01:15:42 AM
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on November 18, 2011, 12:47:14 AMSo Jesus accommodates this particular world view of mankind (which was also present in Judaism) and essentially says: "OK, I'm going to put an end to this "sin" thing altogether. I'll "die for your sins" once and for all, and eliminate the need for further sacrifice and shame and guilt, so we can then get on to the business of having an adult relationship where "sin" is not an issue anymore."
I've focused on this part of your post for the sake of brevity, but I liked the whole post, and the ideas you throw out. How I wish and hope for this kind of maturity in a relationship with a Creator-Deity who is described as Wise and All-Knowing. Thank you for taking the time to sharing these thoughts and ideas. :)
But it seems somewhat made up. Most Christians don't go with this idea. Are they all wrong, except for Ecurb? Does this mean that the bible, being the inspired word of god is such a failure that over a billion people whom have studied it, everyone of them except Ecurb have got it wrong, misunderstood, interpreted incorrectly what it is that god desperately wants people to know.
It seems to me very much that Christians do not want to know god or Jesus. They are much more comfortable inventing a personality that conforms to their own ideas. They then label this personality god or Jesus, tie it into some of the anecdotal stories of the bible such that they feel a common bond with other people whom state they they also believe in god and Jesus. They all quote names and events from the bible, but the interpretations are all different When the bible is clear and specific e.g. that people whom work on the Sabbath should be put to death, the vast, vast majority of Christians tend to interpret this not to mean that people whom work on the Sabbath should be put to death.
I really would like to see some Christians who are seeking the truth about god and Jesus rather than making stuff up in order to give themselves warm fuzzie feelings. Is it because they know that god is non material, non measurable, non interactive, that they are free to invent their own image of god as they please. No one will ever prove them wrong, so what is the harm in making it up?
Oh, I didn't miss the fact that seems speculative in nature. I was just entertaining a moment of unrealistic, wishful, hopeful thinking. I was interested to read his thoughts, but that's all, really.
I too agree that it would be nice if Christians would be a bit more diligent about seeking
truth (as opposed to their pretentiously capitalized "Truth") . And a bit more honest about when apologetics doesn't hold up, and end up falling back on "faith." It occurs to me that they would have to start off by treat the word "faith" as a bad word to make genuine headway with truth, logic, and reason.