Jesus died for our sins??
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-10-2014, 06:38 AM
RE: Jesus died for our sins??
(16-10-2014 04:02 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  One of the really dumb religious explanations is that Jesus had to pay Satan for our release.

That one is really dumb. I would have complained about that one when I was still Christian.

"Satan, in exchange for all these souls that you'd have for infinity years, how about you do a swap for me... for three days. No, you don't get the souls back after three days. I just leave. Deal?"
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2014, 07:04 AM
RE: Jesus died for our sins??
(17-10-2014 01:51 AM)Ace Wrote:  
(17-10-2014 01:11 AM)Chas Wrote:  Not 3 days, it was not quite 2 days: Friday mid-day to Sunday morning is less than 48 hours.

less than 2 days ? that would explain why no one noticed the smell of decomposing flesh when he came back

There was no resurrection in Mark, originally. It ended with an empty tomb. Crucified trouble-makers in the Roman occupation were left on their crosses for the birds to scavenge. The whole scenario reeks.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2014, 08:42 AM
RE: Jesus died for our sins??
It makes no literal sense because it is not intended as a literal statement. Religion is based on allegory. "Sin" represents exposure of the true meaning of metaphors and allegory, or at least denial of literal meanings. The Gnostics exposed the secrets of religious allegory thereby "crucifying" the "Word". To undo the damage, the Gnostics were infiltrated and their teachings corrupted and Christianity was born. Also, heavy censorship was imposed that destroyed all literal references to what the Gnostics had done, but the truth is expressed allegorically in the Gospel accounts and in the works of the Jewish historian Josephus. The literal aspects of the Gospel accounts were needed as a cover story since any admission of the true origin of Christianity would bring about another "apocalypse".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2014, 09:19 AM
RE: Jesus died for our sins??
(17-10-2014 08:42 AM)Anti-oil Wrote:  It makes no literal sense because it is not intended as a literal statement. Religion is based on allegory. "Sin" represents exposure of the true meaning of metaphors and allegory, or at least denial of literal meanings. The Gnostics exposed the secrets of religious allegory thereby "crucifying" the "Word". To undo the damage, the Gnostics were infiltrated and their teachings corrupted and Christianity was born. Also, heavy censorship was imposed that destroyed all literal references to what the Gnostics had done, but the truth is expressed allegorically in the Gospel accounts and in the works of the Jewish historian Josephus. The literal aspects of the Gospel accounts were needed as a cover story since any admission of the true origin of Christianity would bring about another "apocalypse".

References for everything stated required.
Where did you get that definition of "sin" and what reference(s) do you have for that claim. The writings of the Church Fathers who cooked up "original sin" were very clear they meant it literally. Only part of Christianity was influenced by Gnosticism (and by then it was well underway). They did not invent it. What exactly are you talking about "in Josephus" ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2014, 10:41 AM
RE: Jesus died for our sins??
(16-10-2014 12:24 PM)Chrisinfp Wrote:  Can someone please give me a few sentences that explain why this makes no sense. Thanks

Because Substitutionary atonement is not considered sane or moral anywhere except religion, no court would ever allow an unrelated person to be punished for another person's crime.

Nor would it 'wash away' that persons actions.

And also saying that he died for our sins and yet for it to work we have to 'believe' he did it.
What the hell difference does that make?

It makes completely no sense.

Trouble rather the tiger in his lair than the sage among his books. For to you kingdoms and their armies are things mighty and enduring, but to him they are but toys of the moment, to be overturned with the flick of a finger.”

― Gordon R. Dickson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2014, 10:41 AM
RE: Jesus died for our sins??
(17-10-2014 06:38 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  
(16-10-2014 04:02 PM)Mr Woof Wrote:  One of the really dumb religious explanations is that Jesus had to pay Satan for our release.

That one is really dumb. I would have complained about that one when I was still Christian.

"Satan, in exchange for all these souls that you'd have for infinity years, how about you do a swap for me... for three days. No, you don't get the souls back after three days. I just leave. Deal?"
Real people suffered more then Jesus ever did.

Trouble rather the tiger in his lair than the sage among his books. For to you kingdoms and their armies are things mighty and enduring, but to him they are but toys of the moment, to be overturned with the flick of a finger.”

― Gordon R. Dickson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2014, 12:37 PM
RE: Jesus died for our sins??
(17-10-2014 07:04 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(17-10-2014 01:51 AM)Ace Wrote:  less than 2 days ? that would explain why no one noticed the smell of decomposing flesh when he came back

There was no resurrection in Mark, originally. It ended with an empty tomb. Crucified trouble-makers in the Roman occupation were left on their crosses for the birds to scavenge. The whole scenario reeks.

which part in mark exactly............... I haven't read the bible in over a decade and I don't regret it, Doctor Who novels are more entertaining
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2014, 12:58 PM
RE: Jesus died for our sins??
(16-10-2014 03:04 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(16-10-2014 01:41 PM)Chrisinfp Wrote:  I didn't know any of that. Where did you learn that. I'd like to look into it

That's like asking Pee Wee where he learned comedy. Weeping
Let me think about some references.

Well, Pee went to California Institute of the Arts in Valencia. It's a funny place.Laughat

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2014, 01:01 PM (This post was last modified: 17-10-2014 02:53 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Jesus died for our sins??
(17-10-2014 12:37 PM)Ace Wrote:  
(17-10-2014 07:04 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  There was no resurrection in Mark, originally. It ended with an empty tomb. Crucified trouble-makers in the Roman occupation were left on their crosses for the birds to scavenge. The whole scenario reeks.

which part in mark exactly............... I haven't read the bible in over a decade and I don't regret it, Doctor Who novels are more entertaining

All the "trial-execution" *details*, (of all the gospels). If they are modeled on Mark (or the Q document) and Mark was the earliest, those following, just made it up. Some specifically say he was silent, ("lamb to the slaughter"), but in John he gives a long speech, (and it was John's purpose to establish him as the "paschal lamb", which is why he changed the day of the execution). The days and times don't line up, for the trial, or death, (or the Last Supper for that matter). It was Passover weekend and the Sanhedrin was in session ? I think not. All the details of a Roman occupation-crucifixion are wrong. If he was important enough to locate and put to death in the first place, why was no attempt made to re-locate him when (supposed) reports of his post-resurrection activities started to circulate.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-10-2014, 03:17 PM
RE: Jesus died for our sins??
(17-10-2014 12:37 PM)Ace Wrote:  
(17-10-2014 07:04 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  There was no resurrection in Mark, originally. It ended with an empty tomb. Crucified trouble-makers in the Roman occupation were left on their crosses for the birds to scavenge. The whole scenario reeks.

which part in mark exactly............... I haven't read the bible in over a decade and I don't regret it, Doctor Who novels are more entertaining

The original gMark ends at 16:8 verses 9-20 are a later addition. They do not show up in any of the earliest bibles such as the Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Vaticanus

Quote:Mark 16:9–20; —The Book of Mark ends with verse 16:8,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Sinaiticus

Quote:Omitted verses

Gospel of Matthew 12:47, 16:2b-3, 17:21, 18:11, 23:14, Matthew 24:35;
Gospel of Mark 7:16, 9:44, 9:46, 11:26, 15:28, 16:9–20 (Long ending of the Gospel Mark, referring to the appearance of Jesus to many people following the resurrection)

Rational human beings understand that these verses were added to make 'mark' conform to the rest of the bullshit.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: