Old Testament Pfft, Jesus is the MAN!

[AnimatedDirt]

If I believed in a god and eternal happiness or eternal torment, I would certainly spend all my time ensuring I got eternal happiness.
Even if it meant giving away all my money, not worrying about food, water, clothing or even tomorrow.
I'd cut my eyes out so that I don't lust, I'd waste away and die no doubt, but life is fleeting and eternity is forever.
If I believed in god as described in the bible, I wouldn't risk his viscous vengeful wrath.

Luckily our ficticious God doesn't require that we spend all our time ensuring our eternal happiness.

He's ensured it for all who will accept it...as the story goes anyway.

[Stevil]

I can tell you from personal experience that it is hard to keep that level of intensity for that many years.  I think that's why in Christianity it is a matter of faith, not works or level of intensity.

It seems that you have doubts that your god exists, and hence are taking care of "life" as both you and I think you must.
You are disobeying Jesus' wisdom because, like me, you don't think it is good advise. You realise it would lead to death.
Otherwise, I can't think of why you don't follow the wisdom, especially given that eternal damnation awaits

[Sweetdeath]

He just wants you to opress other's  basic human rights, correct?

[Stevil]

If I believed in a god and eternal happiness or eternal torment, I would certainly spend all my time ensuring I got eternal happiness.
Even if it meant giving away all my money, not worrying about food, water, clothing or even tomorrow.
I'd cut my eyes out so that I don't lust, I'd waste away and die no doubt, but life is fleeting and eternity is forever.
If I believed in god as described in the bible, I wouldn't risk his viscous vengeful wrath.

Luckily our ficticious God doesn't require that we spend all our time ensuring our eternal happiness.

He's ensured it for all who will accept it...as the story goes anyway.

Well, no.
It seems many Christians are ignoring what the bible tells us what Jesus said.
You seem to think god allows you to interpret his message however seems fit to your own wants and desires.

It has been quite clearly shown that there is no safety in numbers. If all the people are disobedient then the god is quite happy to foresake them all, as he did in the great flood.
Jesus said to first and foremost seek the kingdom of god, not to worry about food, water or clothing and that god would provide.
It is so very clear, and yet, Christians do not heed this wisdom, they interpret it or ignore it away.

[AnimatedDirt]

If I believed in a god and eternal happiness or eternal torment, I would certainly spend all my time ensuring I got eternal happiness.
Even if it meant giving away all my money, not worrying about food, water, clothing or even tomorrow.
I'd cut my eyes out so that I don't lust, I'd waste away and die no doubt, but life is fleeting and eternity is forever.
If I believed in god as described in the bible, I wouldn't risk his viscous vengeful wrath.

Luckily our ficticious God doesn't require that we spend all our time ensuring our eternal happiness.

He's ensured it for all who will accept it...as the story goes anyway.

Well, no.
It seems many Christians are ignoring what the bible tells us what Jesus said.
You seem to think god allows you to interpret his message however seems fit to your own wants and desires.

It has been quite clearly shown that there is no safety in numbers. If all the people are disobedient then the god is quite happy to foresake them all, as he did in the great flood.
Jesus said to first and foremost seek the kingdom of god, not to worry about food, water or clothing and that god would provide.
It is so very clear, and yet, Christians do not heed this wisdom, they interpret it or ignore it away.

I can't help notice that your interpretation of a fictional character's wisdom, in a fairytale book, pointing to a fairytale diety, is the "right" interpretation.

[Stevil]

I can't help notice that your interpretation of a fictional character's wisdom, in a fairytale book, pointing to a fairytale diety, is the "right" interpretation.

Am I right? Wow.

If you need any more scripture advice, then I guess I'm the man, I call a spade a spade, no twists and turns here folks.

I just read the words for what they are, I don't twist them.
I can easily just read it as it is because it comes with no implications on myself.
I.E. if it says not to worry about food, I am under no obligation to follow because I don't believe it. It's just a fictional story (not a fairytale) and has no bearing on my life.

But if you do believe it to be the inspired word of a god that must be followed then you are in a pickle.

If you don't worry about food then you and your family will starve to death, unless of course Jesus/god follows through on their promise to give these to those whom priorotise on seeking the kingdom of heaven. But neither you nor me believe that Jesus/god will follow through on this promise. We both put great personal effort into ensuring our families are feed and clothed, we don't delegate to the unobservable god. This is our number one priority, unless of course we face something that immediately threatens our lives e.g burning building etc.

You can go off like Bruce did and state that god only promised with regards to food production rather than distribution, but nowhere in the bible does it state this. It just says that these things will be added to you. Now if I live in Ethiopia where there is not enough food and prioritise on seeking the kingdom of god and then find out that god has gone and produced ample food in America, then as I lie starving to death, I would wonder what sick joke this god has made, to give me advice that leads to my death.

I would be keen to hear your interpretation AD. How these words of Jesus were wise and ought to be followed by yourself.
Are you going with Bruce's idea of food production as opposed to food distribution as interpreted by Bruce? Are you going with the literal approach (which is what I have done) based on the words in the book? or do you have something else, maybe some vague reference to another part of the book, or an imagined concept that was left out of the book so that you could inject your answer in there?

I know you previously stated you don't know, and that seems reasonable to me, but why do you think my position is an interpretation rather than a literal reading?

[Ecurb Noselrub]

I can tell you from personal experience that it is hard to keep that level of intensity for that many years.  I think that's why in Christianity it is a matter of faith, not works or level of intensity.

It seems that you have doubts that your god exists, and hence are taking care of "life" as both you and I think you must.
You are disobeying Jesus' wisdom because, like me, you don't think it is good advise. You realise it would lead to death.
Otherwise, I can't think of why you don't follow the wisdom, especially given that eternal damnation awaits

I think you are interpreting my statements in the wrong way.  Not sure how to fix this, hmmm.  I believe that my God exists.  All believers, if they are honest, have some doubts.  That's part of faith.  Like I've said before, I don't interpret the New Testament as teaching eternal suffering - it looks more like annihilation/cessation of existence to me.  All that is required for salvation is faith in Jesus, which I have.  Following every commandment 100% is not part of the package, so to speak.  I do attempt to love others, which is Jesus' great commandment.  All I'm saying is that my dedication level is not what it used to be.  I'm not St. Paul, IOW. 

[Stevil]

All that is required for salvation is faith in Jesus, which I have.

So you don't need to follow the ten or so commandments, you don't need to follow Jesus/god's wisdom?

You just need to believe that there was a man/god called Jesus or Joseph or something like that?

You can be a murderous sadistic rapist, but as long as you believe in the existence of this man/god then you get to live for eternity (after the period of non existence between when you die and when Jesus resurrects you) rather than perish along with the horrible non believers?

And this all makes sense to you?

[Ecurb Noselrub]

All that is required for salvation is faith in Jesus, which I have.

So you don't need to follow the ten or so commandments, you don't need to follow Jesus/god's wisdom?

You just need to believe that there was a man/god called Jesus or Joseph or something like that?

You can be a murderous sadistic rapist, but as long as you believe in the existence of this man/god then you get to live for eternity (after the period of non existence between when you die and when Jesus resurrects you) rather than perish along with the horrible non believers?

And this all makes sense to you?

In the New Covenant, God's commandments are to believe in Jesus and love one another.  I John 3:23.  That makes a lot of sense to me: simple faith in God and loving action toward one's fellow man.  I have no desire to be a murderous sadistic rapist, and I doubt that anyone who sincerely attempts to "love one another" has such a desire, either.  Hard to imagine wanting to love others and at the same time rape and murder them.  Perhaps it has happened, but those are not tendencies that I have found in myself.

[Stevil]

In the New Covenant, God's commandments are to believe in Jesus and love one another.  I John 3:23.  That makes a lot of sense to me: simple faith in God and loving action toward one's fellow man.  I have no desire to be a murderous sadistic rapist, and I doubt that anyone who sincerely attempts to "love one another" has such a desire, either.  Hard to imagine wanting to love others and at the same time rape and murder them.  Perhaps it has happened, but those are not tendencies that I have found in myself.

Not accusing you of wanting to rape and murder,

Just trying to understand what the requirement is with regards to getting the reward of being brought back from the dead to roam New Earth for an eternity.
You stated that the requirement was faith in Jesus, so I am exploring that, but you haven't answered.
I feel faith in Jesus must lead to some more requirements, more so than simply believing in your head, but I don't know what the Christian belief is, so I am asking.

If belief is the only requirement, then I would also like to know why belief is important? Why wouldn't the god resurrect the unbeliever?
How can it make sense?

[Sweetdeath]

All that is required for salvation is faith in Jesus, which I have.

So you don't need to follow the ten or so commandments, you don't need to follow Jesus/god's wisdom?

You just need to believe that there was a man/god called Jesus or Joseph or something like that?

You can be a murderous sadistic rapist, but as long as you believe in the existence of this man/god then you get to live for eternity (after the period of non existence between when you die and when Jesus resurrects you) rather than perish along with the horrible non believers?

And this all makes sense to you?

In the New Covenant, God's commandments are to believe in Jesus and love one another.  I John 3:23.  That makes a lot of sense to me: simple faith in God and loving action toward one's fellow man.  I have no desire to be a murderous sadistic rapist, and I doubt that anyone who sincerely attempts to "love one another" has such a desire, either.  Hard to imagine wanting to love others and at the same time rape and murder them.  Perhaps it has happened, but those are not tendencies that I have found in myself.

I've heard stories of murderers and child molestors in prison who tur to bed. And they have church in jails.

These less than human beings dont deserve church or prayer. When their vicitims give it to them, it shows how dellussional.

Love thy enemy?
How about not. How about, you have the right to get angry and know in your heart if a god existed that allowed this, he is not worthy of your time.

[Stevil]

When their vicitims give it to them, it shows how dellussional.

Love thy enemy?
How about not.

I have not walked in a victim's shoes, I can't possibly understand what it would be like.

From my ignorant perspective,
A victim needs to forgive, not with regards to giving the attacker forgiveness, but with regards to letting go of the hate brewing inside the self. The attacker deserves nothing, certainly not any further thought within the victim's head, for this thought perpetuates the crime and torments the victim.
The victim needs to let go, to move on, to pickup the pieces as best as they can. Vengeance and justice are mere day dreams, illusions of some sort of expectation of cosmic justice.

To forgive is to free the self, to put thoughts on to more important things and people other than the attacker. The attacker is nothing, not the scum on a dirty shoe nor the crud in an old washing machine. Nothing. Maybe attackers hurt people because they want to feel alive, want to know that they exist.
Eradicating them from all thoughts, they will cease to exist (from the victim's perspective), cease to be part of the victim's life.
They don't deserve to be part of the victim's life, the victim is not defined by the attack or the attacker, the attacker is less than meaningless.

Anyway, easier said than done.

[Ecurb Noselrub]

Not accusing you of wanting to rape and murder,

Just trying to understand what the requirement is with regards to getting the reward of being brought back from the dead to roam New Earth for an eternity.
You stated that the requirement was faith in Jesus, so I am exploring that, but you haven't answered.
I feel faith in Jesus must lead to some more requirements, more so than simply believing in your head, but I don't know what the Christian belief is, so I am asking.

If belief is the only requirement, then I would also like to know why belief is important? Why wouldn't the god resurrect the unbeliever?
How can it make sense?

Here's my understanding of how it works. 1. God's grace and revelation is extended to a person; 2. That effects a change in that person, creating faith; 3. With that faith, that person is considered "saved" by God (using biblical language); 4.  The change effected in the person in his/her encounter with God is manifested by that person adopting a n attitude of love toward others; 5. that love becomes the person's primary ethical foundation, guiding that person's behavior.


So, only faith is required for salvation, but the entire encoutner with God also results in behavior guided by love.

[Stevil]

Here's my understanding of how it works. 1. God's grace and revelation is extended to a person; 2. That effects a change in that person, creating faith; 3. With that faith, that person is considered "saved" by God (using biblical language); 4.  The change effected in the person in his/her encounter with God is manifested by that person adopting a n attitude of love toward others; 5. that love becomes the person's primary ethical foundation, guiding that person's behavior.


So, only faith is required for salvation, but the entire encoutner with God also results in behavior guided by love.

OK, thanks for explaining.

You talk about Christians having an adopted attitude of love.

From my perspective:
Atheists are more tolerant of other people and their lifestyles (you don't get organised groups of atheists protesting against same sex marriage, against women having prominent positions of authority)
Atheists are more accepting of diversity (you don't get atheists putting worldview declarations on public money, into public court systems, into schools)
Atheists are more likely to be non judgemental, we don't have black and white rules, we don't believe in objective morality, we understand life is complex. We don't consider people to be sinners, if people's actions don't put us or society in danger then we don't tend to judge.
Atheists are more respecting of the individuals rights (You don't get organised groups of atheists protesting against abortion, against polygomy, against movies with theistic or atheistic themes)

So in my opinion an atheist is more likely to be tolerant, accepting, non judgmental and respecting. These are all aspects of love.
So if we were to measure the love on an ungodly atheist against a faithful Christian, well, in general I feel the atheist is more loving.

[En_Route]

I think ideologues are almost by definition intolerant and tend to have a compassion deficit. There are atheistic zealots as well as religious zealots. In some cases the former are zealots about atheism (I'D include my bête noire Dawkins in this camp ) in other cases they hold non- religious beliefs with the same irrational fervour as religious bigots.