Christianity, why the need?

[Stevil]

They will say he does not SEND them there, they choose by not accepting Jesus as their personal Lord and savior

Reminds me of a terrible "joke"
What do battered women have in common?

The don't do as they are bloody well told!

These both put ownership of the problem onto the victim not the person in the power position.

There are some people who will blame a rape victim for dressing too sexy.

It is all absurd of course but people always look for ways to justify their beliefs or way of thinking. It is a true challenge for a person to justify something against their current beliefs and hence challenge themselves and change as a person.

With the Christianity, you always need to assert, without question, God is Perfect and Loving.
Then you can properly twist anything.
God drowned almost all the people, animals, insects, plants because they were all evil and deserving of death.
God set two she bears onto 42 children because they were evil and deserving of being torn to shreds by a couple of bears (by the way, they don't have to be children, if you have problems with punishing children so severely, you are allowed to interpret them as young adults)
God sends atheists to hell for eternal torture because atheist are evil and deserving of eternal torture.
But God doesn't really send because that seems a like a touch of evil in itself, let's say God doesn't extend his hand to save, actually, god does extend his hand but the evil atheists don't reach out for it hence they slide into hell of their own free will to be tortured for all eternity and in their own selfish way they are making god look bad, how dare they, they deserve the torture, godless bastards!

[Ecurb Noselrub]

There are some of us Christians who have abandoned the concept of eternal torment in hell for precisely the reasons that have been mentioned above. It is possible to go back and re-examine scriptures in light of the love of God and find a different interpretation, one that does not involve eternal torment. However, the idea persists among most, as it is a deeply ingrained meme from centuries back, and difficult to exorcise. The Seventh Day Adventists have abandoned it, as well as individuals in other groups.

[xXxWashburnxXx]

When I was a christian I read the bible and took it for face value. I didn't really think about it's message or question anything really. I think that's the problem most theists face. They don't want to observe and evaluate their religion. They follow it like a lemming.

[Truthseeker]

There are some of us Christians who have abandoned the concept of eternal torment in hell for precisely the reasons that have been mentioned above. It is possible to go back and re-examine scriptures in light of the love of God and find a different interpretation, one that does not involve eternal torment. However, the idea persists among most, as it is a deeply ingrained meme from centuries back, and difficult to exorcise. The Seventh Day Adventists have abandoned it, as well as individuals in other groups.

Yes, I have been made aware of this sector of Christianity.  Carlton Pearson referrs to it as "The Gospel of Inclusion".  I certainly have a much deeper appreciation for this theroy than the traditional one.  I am glad you brought this to the attention of this thread Ecurb, as it should play a role in this discussion.  But my intention behind the thread was to investigate possible reasons that would uncover why certain people, who are otherwise rationale deep thinkers cling to such nonsensical, irrational and repugnant teachings.   

[AnimatedDirt]

There are some of us Christians who have abandoned the concept of eternal torment in hell for precisely the reasons that have been mentioned above. It is possible to go back and re-examine scriptures in light of the love of God and find a different interpretation, one that does not involve eternal torment. However, the idea persists among most, as it is a deeply ingrained meme from centuries back, and difficult to exorcise. The Seventh Day Adventists have abandoned it, as well as individuals in other groups.

<---SDA

I find Stevil's thinking slightly amusing.  It always amazes me that when presented with the Christian God of the Bible, most (if not all) Atheists will say something to the effect, "If that is God...I don't want any part of it!"  Then they turn the argument into a "God forces" or "God extends but..." or "We don't reach out..." and so...put the blame back on God.

God is perfectly portrayed in scripture.  If the Atheist doesn't like the offer, why be angry at God for not saving everyone?  Not everyone wants this salvation.  The Atheist is happy to live and die and be no more...and God simply says ok...why is that so hard to deal with?

[Stevil]

I find Stevil's thinking slightly amusing.  It always amazes me that when presented with the Christian God of the Bible, most (if not all) Atheists will say something to the effect, "If that is God...I don't want any part of it!"  Then they turn the argument into a "God forces" or "God extends but..." or "We don't reach out..." and so...put the blame back on God.

God is perfectly portrayed in scripture.  If the Atheist doesn't like the offer, why be angry at God for not saving everyone?  Not everyone wants this salvation.  The Atheist is happy to live and die and be no more...and God simply says ok...why is that so hard to deal with?

And yet the Christian, no matter how educated, continually ignores the parts of the bible which talk about the god performing mass killings of people, animals. insects, plants. Or torturing people or condoning of rape. Some even ignore the bible when it says that people should be put to death or that man should not wear clothes made of more than one cloth. Some ignore the concept of hell as portrayed in the bible because they find that inconsistent with their mental image of god, therefore they interpret away the inconsistencies.
Interpretation is the key. As soon as science proves something incorrect, then all of a sudden that part of the bible was obviously not meant to be taken literally.

[AnimatedDirt]

I find Stevil's thinking slightly amusing.  It always amazes me that when presented with the Christian God of the Bible, most (if not all) Atheists will say something to the effect, "If that is God...I don't want any part of it!"  Then they turn the argument into a "God forces" or "God extends but..." or "We don't reach out..." and so...put the blame back on God.

God is perfectly portrayed in scripture.  If the Atheist doesn't like the offer, why be angry at God for not saving everyone?  Not everyone wants this salvation.  The Atheist is happy to live and die and be no more...and God simply says ok...why is that so hard to deal with?

And yet the Christian, no matter how educated, continually ignores the parts of the bible which talk about the god performing mass killings of people, animals. insects, plants. Or torturing people or condoning of rape. Some even ignore the bible when it says that people should be put to death or that man should not wear clothes made of more than one cloth. Some ignore the concept of hell as portrayed in the bible because they find that inconsistent with their mental image of god, therefore they interpret away the inconsistencies.
Interpretation is the key. As soon as science proves something incorrect, then all of a sudden that part of the bible was obviously not meant to be taken literally.

Again for the "100th" time her at HAF...the Bible is a historical record.  It sugar-coats nothing of Man's natural tendencies.  Just because it mentions this and that happened, doesn't make it "condoning" to do so.

There are many books and movies that speak of things we don't condone.  Our society is full of people that do these things and if a book was kept of all our crimes, does that say to the future person reading about it in 4012ish that we condoned these in 2012? 

[Ecurb Noselrub]

And yet the Christian, no matter how educated, continually ignores the parts of the bible which talk about the god performing mass killings of people, animals. insects, plants. Or torturing people or condoning of rape. Some even ignore the bible when it says that people should be put to death or that man should not wear clothes made of more than one cloth. Some ignore the concept of hell as portrayed in the bible because they find that inconsistent with their mental image of god, therefore they interpret away the inconsistencies.
Interpretation is the key. As soon as science proves something incorrect, then all of a sudden that part of the bible was obviously not meant to be taken literally.

In other words, biblical interpretation is like science - when something is disproven, it is no longer believed, or it is reinterpreted. What's wrong with that?

[AnimatedDirt]

And yet the Christian, no matter how educated, continually ignores the parts of the bible which talk about the god performing mass killings of people, animals. insects, plants. Or torturing people or condoning of rape. Some even ignore the bible when it says that people should be put to death or that man should not wear clothes made of more than one cloth. Some ignore the concept of hell as portrayed in the bible because they find that inconsistent with their mental image of god, therefore they interpret away the inconsistencies.
Interpretation is the key. As soon as science proves something incorrect, then all of a sudden that part of the bible was obviously not meant to be taken literally.

In other words, biblical interpretation is like science - when something is disproven, it is no longer believed, or it is reinterpreted. What's wrong with that?

I never thought of it quite in that fashion.  +1   

[Stevil]

In other words, biblical interpretation is like science - when something is disproven, it is no longer believed, or it is reinterpreted. What's wrong with that?

Science doesn't claim to be the truth. It merely models observations. If models are proven to be wrong then it changes the model to again align with observations. Science is a journey of exploration and discovery, science tests its own models. Science does not tell people how to live their lives, how to treat others and how to force a way of life onto others.

Religion, sit there and says I am the Truth, I know everything, seek no further. Judge and condemn those whom do not live my way.

[Crow]

In other words, biblical interpretation is like science - when something is disproven, it is no longer believed, or it is reinterpreted. What's wrong with that?

This is something I thoroughly dislike, it grinds my gears when religion and science are held together on the same page, they aren't related even in the slightest. No holy book applies by the standards we use for science or archeology, nor is it consistent with them therefore can not be viewed as a literal interpretation of the world or an accurate depiction of history. They can only really be viewed as philosophy or art using the constructs of mythology to depict meaning similarly to the works of Aristotle.

[Truthseeker]

Science doesn't claim to be the truth. It merely models observations. If models are proven to be wrong then it changes the model to again align with observations. Science is a journey of exploration and discovery, science tests its own models. Science does not tell people how to live their lives, how to treat others and how to force a way of life onto others.

Religion, sit there and says I am the Truth, I know everything, seek no further. Judge and condemn those whom do not live my way.

I am having a difficult time understanding why there is an apparent need to explain this rather simple concept to anyone.  I mean surely this should go without saying.   

[AnimatedDirt]

In other words, biblical interpretation is like science - when something is disproven, it is no longer believed, or it is reinterpreted. What's wrong with that?

Science doesn't claim to be the truth. It merely models observations. If models are proven to be wrong then it changes the model to again align with observations. Science is a journey of exploration and discovery, science tests its own models. Science does not tell people how to live their lives, how to treat others and how to force a way of life onto others.

Religion, sit there and says I am the Truth, I know everything, seek no further. Judge and condemn those whom do not live my way.

You've got it a bit twisted.  While Christians do do this, it is not what the Bible says to do.  The Bible says we can judge by people's actions as to whether they are or aren't what they say they are.  No where does it say to go out and change society at large or condemn.  You may be thinking of the OT ways which differ greatly from the NT ways.  The OT...think of it as a parent with a young child would dictate how to and what to do where as the NT assumes the child is now an adult and already has been taught...no longer "forced" as a child might be to follow rules in a household would, but now independant and can think and act as an adult would.

[Stevil]

You've got it a bit twisted.  While Christians do do this, it is not what the Bible says to do.

By their fruits shall they be judged.

Christians are the fruit of the Christian bible.

[AnimatedDirt]

You've got it a bit twisted.  While Christians do do this, it is not what the Bible says to do.

By their fruits shall they be judged.

Christians are the fruit of the Christian bible.

By their fruit you will recognize them...for sure.  Christians are 100% corrupt like the rest of Man.