Why Nobody Should Be a Christian (Even if the bible is true.)

[Stevil]

Jesus did not sin, yet was put on a cross and serves as atonement for all.
he serves as an example of the gift of God...eternal life.  That's why He is alive and in paradise.

These statements really do seem childish to me.

You have no validation what so ever as to whether Jesus actually lived, whether there is a god, whether Jesus has anything to do with the god/s. Whether there is such a thing as eternal life. Whether Jesus is alive or has ever lived, there is no validation of a paradise in an afterlife and there is no validation of an afterlife.
For all you know this could all be made up.

The concept of Jesus not sinning is an oxymoron. depending on your definition of sin.
If you term sin as "rebellion against, or resistance to, the direction of supreme authority" well, you are also recognising Jesus as the supreme authority. So how can he rebel against himself?
Some Christians suggest that everyone is born with the stain of original sin, but Jesus and possibly Mary were not. So already Jesus' level is already unattainable, even for the aborted fetus.

If we deem, not honoring thy Mother or Father as a sin, then I would be willing to bet large amounts of money that two year old Jesus was absolutly dripping with sin, from head to feet.
Is lust a sin? Did Jesus have no desire what so ever for human women? Our girls not good enough for him? Or did he only have eyes for mummy? If humans had no lust, just like Jesus then we would never procreate. This would be a disastrous end to the human race.

Now if we consider Jesus to be god and then we look at god's first book the OT. Well, let me tell you about some of the sin that Jesus performed.
He murdered a bunch of kids by setting a couple of Bears on them, he turn a woman to salt for looking at a town that he destroyed. He killed almost all the animals, plants and people on the planet by flooding it on purpose with the intent to kill. He killed Egyptian first borns just to prove a point. This ruthless tyrant was far worse than Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Lenin combined. If he were tried in a human court he would have surely been sentenced to death as one of the biggest threats human kind has encountered.

When you say he died on a cross as atonement for all, well, this death wasn't his choice, it was against his will. He was put to death for dissent to the Jewish and Roman people of the time, he was making a nuisance of himself. His death wasn't for us, there was no blood sacrifice. He was not killed as an offering to the gods. He was going to die anyway, being human, made of flesh and blood, it was inevitable. There really is no significance to his death and less significance to his life, if he lived at all.

[Sandra Craft]

Please don't burn the forum down while I'm asleep.

Goodnight
Chris

Some of us will stand by with fire hoses, just in case.

[Sandra Craft]

No one is going to read the bible like God is a nutjob if they have already decided they believe in it - whether I think they should believe in it is another matter, but adding that "if the bible is true" bit is the part that gets me. No one would believe it's true and still interpret it that way, I don't think.

I don't know, I accepted that god was real and good and all the rest until I read the bible and the nutjob interpretation became unavoidable, despite all my early training.  The bible can be a real eye-opener, in more ways than one.

[Tank]

Please don't burn the forum down while I'm asleep.

Goodnight
Chris

You're going to sleep?
What timezone are you in?

The first one, UK.

[DeterminedJuliet]

No one is going to read the bible like God is a nutjob if they have already decided they believe in it - whether I think they should believe in it is another matter, but adding that "if the bible is true" bit is the part that gets me. No one would believe it's true and still interpret it that way, I don't think.

I don't know, I accepted that god was real and good and all the rest until I read the bible and the nutjob interpretation became unavoidable, despite all my early training.  The bible can be a real eye-opener, in more ways than one.

I think it's an eye-opener because it just doesn't make much sense if you read through it, and gives you plenty of reason to doubt it's truthfulness. But OP was saying that his agrument is within the context of the bible being true, even if it's illogical.

I guess I'm just hung up on that because I can't imagine why any atheist would even put an "even if the bible is true" in their argument, because it's obvious to most of us that it's not.

[Davin]

[...]Jesus did not sin, yet was put on a cross and serves as atonement for all.

Didn't you also claim that we're all sinners from conception? Then would not Jesus have sin from his mother's side?

[AnimatedDirt]

My argument is not based on interpretation,

It's not even based on the correct fairytale as you have a few things wrong with your interpretation of the story itself, let alone the interpretation of what it means.

This is an entirely unsubstantiated claim - I mean to say, you're just saying something without even trying to back it up. Furthermore, I was a Christian for eight years, once upon a time considered myself an apologist, and have a perfectly fine understanding of what it's supposed to mean. I just happen to think it's nonsensical, which is what Christians commonly refer to as "lack of knowledge".

Clearly you don't even know what I find wrong with your basis.  If you can't even get how the story goes correctly, how can you be taken seriously?  An apologist?  I find that hard to believe given the fundamental flaws you have on the subject matter itself.

[AnimatedDirt]

Didn't you also claim that we're all sinners from conception?

I agree with the biblical claim, I didn't originate the claim myself.

Then would not Jesus have sin from his mother's side?

If he was fully human only, yes.  But as the "story" tells us, He is fully God and fully human.  Here's just one link that explains it better than I could here.

Hebrews 4:15 tells us that Jesus was human form was tempted as we are and yet was without sin.

This question can go so deep, I am certainly not the right person to FULLY answer it.

If you could, leave aside whether you believe the Bible to be historical or not and take it as simply a story such as LotR or Harry Potter or better yet, just take it at face value.  Get the basics and see how and why THE STORY says things are so.  The OT has a heavy bearing on the NT.  A lot of the questions of the NT is answered in the OT and vice versa, a lot of the OT questions is answered in the NT.  A good Bible has marginal links from the OT to the NT and NT to the OT. 

[Davin]

Didn't you also claim that we're all sinners from conception?

I agree with the biblical claim, I didn't originate the claim myself.

No one said you did originate the claim yourself.

Then would not Jesus have sin from his mother's side?

If he was fully human only, yes.  But as the "story" tells us, He is fully God and fully human.  Here's just one link that explains it better than I could here.

Hebrews 4:15 tells us that Jesus was human form was tempted as we are and yet was without sin.

This question can go so deep, I am certainly not the right person to FULLY answer it.

If you could, leave aside whether you believe the Bible to be historical or not and take it as simply a story such as LotR or Harry Potter or better yet, just take it at face value.  Get the basics and see how and why THE STORY says things are so.  The OT has a heavy bearing on the NT.  A lot of the questions of the NT is answered in the OT and vice versa, a lot of the OT questions is answered in the NT.  A good Bible has marginal links from the OT to the NT and NT to the OT.

Already done so:
1. All people are sinners from conception
2. Jesus was conceived
3. Therefore, Jesus is a sinner

If you say that Jesus was only half human, then he's half a sinner. You can't have both that everyone is a sinner from conception and that Jesus was without sin because his mum was a person... at least not in a universe that has the law of non-contradiction.

[AnimatedDirt]

Didn't you also claim that we're all sinners from conception?

I agree with the biblical claim, I didn't originate the claim myself.

No one said you did originate the claim yourself.

Then would not Jesus have sin from his mother's side?

If he was fully human only, yes.  But as the "story" tells us, He is fully God and fully human.  Here's just one link that explains it better than I could here.

Hebrews 4:15 tells us that Jesus was human form was tempted as we are and yet was without sin.

This question can go so deep, I am certainly not the right person to FULLY answer it.

If you could, leave aside whether you believe the Bible to be historical or not and take it as simply a story such as LotR or Harry Potter or better yet, just take it at face value.  Get the basics and see how and why THE STORY says things are so.  The OT has a heavy bearing on the NT.  A lot of the questions of the NT is answered in the OT and vice versa, a lot of the OT questions is answered in the NT.  A good Bible has marginal links from the OT to the NT and NT to the OT.

Already done so:
1. All people are sinners from conception
2. Jesus was conceived
3. Therefore, Jesus is a sinner

If you say that Jesus was only half human, then he's half a sinner. You can't have both that everyone is a sinner from conception and that Jesus was without sin because his mum was a person... at least not in a universe that has the law of non-contradiction.

You are so right, Davin.  I concede to your cartoon and renounce my Christianity.

[Davin]

You are so right, Davin.  I concede to your cartoon and renounce my Christianity.

It was an untenable position, all I did was point it out.

[AnimatedDirt]

You are so right, Davin.  I concede to your cartoon and renounce my Christianity.

It was an untenable position, all I did was point it out.

Yep.  With your cartoon, you won.  Good on you!

[Davin]

You are so right, Davin.  I concede to your cartoon and renounce my Christianity.

It was an untenable position, all I did was point it out.

Yep.  With your cartoon, you won.  Good on you!

With the cartoon? A'ight, thanks.

[AnimatedDirt]

With the cartoon? A'ight, thanks.

Of course!  Cartoon > AD.

[Davin]

With the cartoon? A'ight, thanks.

Of course!  Cartoon > AD.

Like I said in the other thread: If you have a problem, then please let me know what it is.