Contradictions and Problems with Essential Christian Doctrine?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-09-2013, 08:07 AM
RE: Contradictions and Problems with Essential Christian Doctrine?
As a prophet, one time I had to believe in all religion. As a gnostic atheist, I believe my own theology. Thumbsup

...and tao te ching, of course. The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao. That's a first line that's inerrant. Always helps to trump another's scripture with your own. Thumbsup

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 08:11 AM
 
RE: Contradictions and Problems with Essential Christian Doctrine?
(06-09-2013 07:26 AM)Paranoidsam Wrote:  The whole purpose of a messiah is so God can forgive humans for Adam's "original sin". But, science has shown pretty much the entirety of Genesis to be pure mythology, no Adam and Eve, no forbidden fruit etc... therefore no need for a messiah to exist at all.

Not to mention that the idea of "original sin" was coined by Christians - it doesn't appear in the Old Testament.
People could have been saved by following the Law, which was meant to be permanent (Ezek. 37:24, Isa 24:5, Psalm 111:7-9, 119:108-118).
Also, God was not meant to ever incarnate as a human being (Num. 23:19, Isa. 43:11, Psalm 146:3).
In the OT, God was a creator of both good and evil (Isa. 45:7, 2 Kings 6:33, Jer. 45:5...). Satan wasn't as "rebellious" as in the NT (Job 1:6-12).

Christianity is a religion completely different from Judaism. That's why Christian apologists call it "progressive revelation." Weeping
Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 08:33 AM (This post was last modified: 06-09-2013 03:57 PM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: Contradictions and Problems with Essential Christian Doctrine?
(06-09-2013 08:11 AM)Philosoraptor Wrote:  In the OT, God was a creator of both good and evil (Isa. 45:7, 2 Kings 6:33, Jer. 45:5...). Satan wasn't as "rebellious" as in the NT (Job 1:6-12).


Satan is the evolutionary byproduct of the ancient Hebrew's discomfort of having just one god responsible for good and evil. With their earlier polytheistic and monolatrist polytheism, there were always other gods to take the heat for the bad things that happened. But when you're down to just one god, then he logically has to be responsible for all of the evil too. Fortunately the ancient Hebrew had two tools at their disposal to square this circle; revisionist editing of their holy books, and a penchant for scapegoating. Thus Satan emerged out of earlier concepts, and the earlier precursors are still there to be seen in the text.




[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 03:10 PM
RE: Contradictions and Problems with Essential Christian Doctrine?
Awesome video. Never thought about it that way, but it sure makes a lot more sense when you do....

Don't sell yourself short Judge, you're an incredible slouch.

Martin Luther was the "father" of two movements - The Reformation and Nazism.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 03:30 PM
RE: Contradictions and Problems with Essential Christian Doctrine?
If you're talking with theists who disregard the evil of the old testament because "Jesus made a new covenant with man," you could bring up the fact that Jesus still supported OT laws...

I think it's in Mark where he bitches at people who are not following the law of killing kids who curse their parents.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 03:50 PM
RE: Contradictions and Problems with Essential Christian Doctrine?
(06-09-2013 08:11 AM)Philosoraptor Wrote:  
(06-09-2013 07:26 AM)Paranoidsam Wrote:  The whole purpose of a messiah is so God can forgive humans for Adam's "original sin". But, science has shown pretty much the entirety of Genesis to be pure mythology, no Adam and Eve, no forbidden fruit etc... therefore no need for a messiah to exist at all.

Not to mention that the idea of "original sin" was coined by Christians - it doesn't appear in the Old Testament.
People could have been saved by following the Law, which was meant to be permanent (Ezek. 37:24, Isa 24:5, Psalm 111:7-9, 119:108-118).
Also, God was not meant to ever incarnate as a human being (Num. 23:19, Isa. 43:11, Psalm 146:3).
In the OT, God was a creator of both good and evil (Isa. 45:7, 2 Kings 6:33, Jer. 45:5...). Satan wasn't as "rebellious" as in the NT (Job 1:6-12).

Christianity is a religion completely different from Judaism. That's why Christian apologists call it "progressive revelation." Weeping


And that was originally all that Jebus taught. Nothing about himself dying for anything, or accepting him ... nothing.

Matt. 19:16-22, “And behold, one came to Him and said, “Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may obtain eternal life?” 17 And He said to him, “Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” 18 He said to Him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said, “You shall not commit murder; You shall not commit adultery; You shall not steal; You shall not bear false witness; 19 Honor your father and mother; and You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 07:28 PM
RE: Contradictions and Problems with Essential Christian Doctrine?
No problem with the "core" doctrines, um, yeah I wouldn't go there. Most of the problems with the essential doctrine are just why was this the best, most perfect way of going about supposed god's goals?

First of all, the idea of blood atonement is a brutal, bronze-age superstition that I find quite repulsive and illogical. How does killing something make god happy with you, and why would that be so? To me the eastern idea that killing does NOT make god happy makes much more sense to me.

The idea of "substitutional" atonement also makes little sense, especially when you are considering that it is god sacrificing himself, to himself. "We did good!" This circularity is quite hilarious. Just as easily he could have said - I'm going to forgive these people when they ask me to. Why this obscure route? Is this some kind of perfect plan? I would watch some videos on this on youtube, some very good ones out there. Nonstampcollector, etc. Get your brain working in this direction to analyze these doctrines critically. Why does ANY of it make sense. To me it doesn't, its silliness.

Don't sell yourself short Judge, you're an incredible slouch.

Martin Luther was the "father" of two movements - The Reformation and Nazism.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: